r$ai)ii$loo 


SECOND  EDITION 
I9O5 


Textiles 
TS14-93 
D7 
1^05 


PRESEN 1 

the  draper  company 

HOPEDALE,  MASS. 


She  1.  3ft.  Mill  library 

North  (taroltna  £>tatp  Unitierattu, 


Textiles 
TS]>93 
D7 
1905 


RARE  BOOKCASL 


RARE  BOOKCASE 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  DATE 
INDICATED  BELOW  AND  IS  SUB- 
JECT TO  AN  OVERDUE  FINE  AS 
POSTED  AT  THE  CIRCULATION 
DESK. 


100M/7-85 


THE  FIRST  NORTHROP  LOOM. 


Designed  for  the  weaving  of  Print  Cloth  and  Sheetings 
solely.  Used  with  great  success  on  plain  two-harness  weaves  by 
our  original  customers. 

It  was  this  model  that  first  proved  a  weaver's  capacity  to 
run  sixteen  looms. 

It  incorporated  the  inventions  of: — 

James  H.  Northrop, 
Charles  F.  Roper, 
William  F.  Draper, 
George  Otis  Draper, 
Edward  S.  Stimpson  and 
[ohn  W.   Keki.kv. 

The  loom  frame  and  other  conventional  parts  were  designed 
for  the  Hopedale  Machine  Company  under  supervision  of 
Oren  B.  Smith.  The  II.  M.  Co.  was  incorporated  with  the 
present  Draper  Company  in  1896. 


LABOR-SAVING  LOOMS. 

(SECOND    EDITION.) 

A    BRIEF    TREATISE    ON 

Is?lain   Leaving 

AND    THE 

RECENT  IMPROVEMENTS   IN 

THAT     LINE    WITH    SPECIAL 
REEERENCE  TO  THE     .    .    . 

N0HT8R0P  iioojws 

MANUFACTURED    BY 

DRAPER  COMPANY, 

HOPEDALE,   MASS., 

u.  s.  ^. 

190  5 


COPYRIGHT  1905, 

BY   DRAPER    COMPANY. 


WRITTEN     AND     COMPILED    BY 

GEORGE    OTIS    DRAPER, 

SECRETARY   OF   THE    DRAPER   COMPANY. 


PRINTED    BY 

Cook  &   Sons,   Milfokd,  Mass. 


PREFACE. 

This  book  cannot  serve  as  a  detailed  catalogue  by  which  the 
purchaser  can  always  note  the  exact  nature  of  the  device-  we 
shall  continue  to  sell,  as  improvements  are  often  unexpectedly 
invented.  We  can  hardly  expect  to  publish  a  work  of  this  size 
at  short  intervals,  but  shall  try  to  keep  it  reasonably  up  to  date 
by  amended  additions.  New  matter  will  be  inserted  in  the  final 
pages  of  each  new  edition. 


OUR  HOPEDALE  PLANT  IN  1904. 

Scale.  315  feet  to  the  inch. 

About  2j  acres  of  Horn-  space  in  all. 


FORMER    LITERATURE    ON    THE 
NORTHROP  LOOM. 

1895. 

Circular — The  Advent  of  the  Northrop  Loom,  issued  April, 
1895. 

Essay,  The  Present  Development  of  the  Northrop  Loom, 
delivered  by  George  Otis  Draper  at  the  meeting  of  the  N.  E. 
Cotton  Manufacturers'  Association  at  Atlanta,  Ga.,  Oct.  24, 
1895.     Printed  in  Vol.  59  of  the  Transactions. 

1S96. 

Papers  on  The  Northrop  Loom,  by  F.  M.  Messenger,  John 
H.  Ilines,  H.  D.  Wheat,  and  discussion  by  Wm.  F.  Draper. 
Arthur  II .  Lowe,  George  F.  Whittam  and  W.  J.  Kent,  April 
29,  1S96,  printed  in  Vol.  60  of  the  Transactions  of  the  X.  E. 
Cotton  Manufacturers'  Association. 

Chapter  in  Facts  and  Figures,  on  the  Northrop  Loom,  pub- 
lished by  George  Draper  iV;  Sons  in  the  spring  of   1896. 

Speech  of  Hon.  Wm.  C.  Lovering,  published  in  the  Scien- 
tific American  of  May  2,  1S96,  and  other  papers,  containing 
pertinent  reference  to  the  loom. 

Pamphlet—  The  Looms  of  the  South,  by  F.  B.  de  Berard, 
issued  March,  1896,  containing  detail  of  savings  from  use  of  the 
Northrop  Loom  in  Southern  mills. 

Speech  of  I  Ion.  Charles  Warren  Lippitt,  published  in  the 
Manufacturers'  Record  of  June  19.  and  papers  generally  through- 
out the  country,  giving  the  history  of  the  Northrop  loom  devel- 
opment as  illustrative  of  the  educational  influence  of  manufac- 
turing. 


'897- 

Pamphlet — Instructions  for  Running  Northrop  Looms,  issued 
by  George  Draper  &  Sons,  January,  1897. 

Pamphlet — Instructions  Pour  la  ConJuitc  de  Metiers  Northrop, 
issued  by  the  Draper  Company,  1S97. 

Circular — Our  Common  Loom,  issued  by  the  Draper  Com- 
pany. June.  1897. 

Circular — The  Triumph  of  the  Northrop  Loom.  November, 
1897. 

1S9S. 

Circular — Our  Connection  with  the  Art  of  Weaving,  issued 
by  the  Draper  Company,  April.  189S. 

Circular — Take-up  Mechanism,  issued  by  the  Draper  Corn- 
pan;'.  189S. 

Article — Industrial  Investigations,  by  Jacob  Schoenhof,  in 
The  Forum  for  October,  189S.  Referred  to  the  great  savings 
of  the  "Automatic  loom.''  as  affecting  differences  in  cost  of 
production. 

1S99. 

Pamphlet — Instructions  for  Running  Northrop  Looms,  (  Re- 
vised Edition  )  issued  by  the   Draper  Company.   January,    1S99. 

Pamphlet — Machinery  and  Labor  Displacement,  by  George 
Gunton,  issued  by  the  Gunton  Institute,  containing  pertinent 
reference  to  the  Northrop  Loom  as  a  labor-saving  invention. 

1900. 

Circular — The  Advance  of  the  Northrop  Loom,  January ,  1900. 

Pamphlet — Factory  Conditions  in  the  South,  January  20, 
1900.  by  George  Gunton,  in  Gunton's  Lecture  Bureau  course. 


Paper  on  Method  of  Cost  Finding,  by  Wm.  G.  Nichols, 
delivered  at  a  meeting  <>t"  the  X.  E.  Cotton  Manufacturers'  Asso- 
ciation at  Boston.  April  26,  1900.  Printed  in  Vol.  68  of  the 
Transactions. 

Essay  on  Improvements  in  American  Cotton  Machinery,  by 
George  Otis  Draper,  delivered  at  a  meeting  of  the  Southern 
Cotton  Spinners'  Association  at  Charlotte,  X.  C,  May  18,  1900. 
Printed  in  the  Association  records  and  various  periodicals. 


1 90 1 . 

Chapter  in  Textile  Texts,  published  by  the  Draper  Com- 
pany, spring  of   1 90 1. 

Various  articles  in  publication,  Cotton  Chats,  started  in 
July,  1901,  and  continued  since. 

Circular  on  Important  Discovery,  relating  to  method  of  spin- 
ning to  prevent  bunches  in  cloth,  August,  1901. 


1902. 

Circular  on  The  Keene  Drawing-in  Machine,  January,  1902. 
References  in  Census  Bulletin  Xo.  21  ^.    June  2S,  1902. 


1903. 

Circular  on  The  Northrop  Loom,  issued  by  the  British 
Xorthrop  Loom  Co..  January,  1903. 

Essay  on  Continued  Development  of  the  Northrop  Loom,  deliv- 
ered by  General  Draper  at  a  meeting  of  the  X.  E.  Cotton  Man- 
ufacturers' Association  in  Boston.  April  23,  1903.  printed  in 
Vol.  74  of  the  Transactions. 

Various  references  in  a  book,  V'/ie  American  Ct>ti<>//  Industry, 
by  T.  M.  Young,  published  by  Charles  Scribners'  Sons,   1903. 


IO 


Chapter  on  Northrop  Loom  in  Textile  Texts,  second  edi- 
tion, issued  December,  1903. 

Essa)  on  The  Development  of  the  Northrop  Loom,  delivered 
before    the    Providence    Society    of    Mechanical    Engineers   by 

George  Otis  Draper,   printed  in  Providence    Journal.   Dec.    28, 
1903.  and  other  trade  journals. 

1904. 

Circular  on  List  of  Northrop  Looms  Sold,  issued  January, 
1904. 

Article  on  Evolution  of  the  Cotton  Industry,  published  in 
Gunton's  Magazine  for  February,  1904. 

Pamphlet — Labor  Saving  Looms,  (First  Edition  ) . 

Article  on  Is  there  a  limit  to  rising  wages?  published  in  Gun- 
ton's  Magazine  for  July,  1904. 

Reference  in  article  on  The  Cotton  Industry  in  the  Cosmo- 
politan Magazine  for  July,  1904. 

Address  of  President  Herbert  E.  Walmsley  to  the  New 
England  Cotton  Manufacturer-'  Association,  published  in  Vol. 
77  of  the  Transactions. 

Article  on  The  Northrop  Loom  in  England,  by  H.  P.  Gregg, 
published  in  British  papers  Dec.  31. 

1905. 

Varied  press  comment  on  labor  conditions  as  affected  by 
automatic  weaving. 

References  in  Cotton  Manufactures  in  Massachusetts  and  the 
Southern  States,  published  by  the  Massachusetts  Bureau  of  Sta- 
tistic- of   Labor.  190^. 

(  List  complete  only  to  July  i-t.  ) 


COLLECTED  EVIDENCE. 

Also  Northrop  Loom  History,  Vol.  I,  1889-1892 — 574 
pages. 

Northrop  Loom  History,  Vol.  II,  1893-1896 — 1097 
pages. 

Northrop  Loom  History,  Vol.  Ill,  1897-1900 — 818 
pages. 

These  books  are  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Draper  Company 
and  were  compiled  for  general  reference  and  use  by  counsel 
during  litigation.  They  contain  the  history  of  the  experiments 
and  development  of  the  loom,  and  associated  matters  of  inter- 
est. Their  contents  are  naturally  priyate,  and  not  intended  for 
general  circulation,  although  the  public  is  therefore  depriyed  of 
an  acquaintance  with  a  unique  mechanical  romance.  It  is 
believed  that  no  other  volumes  of  like  size  were  ever  prepared 
for  such  a  purpose. 


In  our  circular  of  November,  1S97,  we  had  a  word  to  say 
to  possible  competitors,  which  still  seems  pertinent.  We  there- 
fore reprint  a  portion  as  a  few  unfortunate  experimenters  failed 
to  note  its  truth  on  first  appearance  : 

"There  are  doubtless  many  bright  men  who  will  in  the  next  tew 
years  give  time  and  toil  in  the  endeavor  to  evade  the  claims  of  our  pat- 
ents while  producing  similar  mechanism.  In  view  of  the  many  other 
fields  for  inventive  skill  we  ask — Is  it  worth  the  while?  We  are  un- 
doubtedly ili«'  first  in  the  field  and  legitimately  entil  led  to  a  fair  reward 
for  the  expenditure  of  money,  loss  of  time  and  consumption  of  brain 
energy.  Our  success  is  no  vagary  of  chance  or  lucky  stroke  of  for- 
tune. Every  step  in  advance  has  hern  gained  after  constant  thought 
and  experiment,  with  ten  failures  tor  every  Success.  The  patent  othce 
has  recognized  the  novelty  of  our  device-  by  broad  basic  claims.    We 

have  searched  the  records  here  and  abroad,  and  have  proof  that  we  are 
pioneers  in  our  line.  We  shall  defend  our  rights  in  the  courts  with  the 
obstinacy  of  conviction,  if  such  methods  are  necessary.  We  bave  no 
wish  for  chance  to  show  our  strength.  A  lawsuit  involves  a  waste  ol 
energy  for  one  side  at  least,  and  an  expense  Cor  both.  We  appreciate 
these  facts  after  thirty  vears  of  continuous  litigation.1" 


I  2 


THE  ART  OF  WEAVING. 


The  process  of  weaving  cloth  consists  in  interlacing  a  con- 
tinuous thread  amidst  a  series  of  parallel  threads.  Without 
giving  an  exhaustive  history  of  the  art  it  may  be  pertinent  for 
further  comparison  to  note  down  certain  steps  in  its  progress. 
It  is  fairly  well  established  to-day  that  woven  goods  were  used 
as  clothing  by  the  ancient  Egyptians  fully  6000  years  ago.  I 
have  seen  in  Switzerland  a  preserved  section  of  a  net  woven  of 

twisted  threads  supposed  to  have 
been  the  work  of  the  Lake  dwellers 
in  pre-historic  times.  In  the  ear- 
lier processes  it  is  probable  that 
the  warp  threads  were  stretched  on 
pegs,  the  weft  bring  inserted  by 
the  fingers.  In  such  weaving  the 
warp  threads  usually  lie  vertically 
and  in  fact  this  is  the  method  used 


l3 


to-day  in  producing  rugs  in  the  Orient  with  short  wefts.  With 
the  use  of  longer  weft  also  came  the  use  of  a  stick  with  a 
hooked  end  for  pulling  it  into  position.  If  we  are  to  form  our 
further  comparisons  on  a  plain  print  cloth  of  the  present  width  of 
28  inches  containing  64  threads  of  warp  and  64  of  filling  per  inch, 
it  is  possible  that  the  rate  of  weaving  by  this  method  on  such 
goods  could  be  figured  as  low  as  one  pick  per  minute  per  opera- 
tive in  the  earliest  use.      Cloth  is  still   woven  by  this  method  in 

India,  although  a  harness  motion 
is  added.  History  gives  no  rec- 
ord of  the  time  at  which  the 
warp  threads  were  divided  by  har- 
nesses and  the  shuttle  introduced. 
References  are  made  to  shuttles  in 
the  Bible  and  other  ancient  books. 
It  is  probable  that  the  general 
styles  of  hand  loom  weaving  were 
very  similar  for  many  centuries 
without  definite  change  until  the 
invention  of  the  fly  shuttle  by  John 
Kav    in    1733.      At   this    time,    in 

weaving  broad  cloth  it 
was  necessary  to  have 
two  weavers  at  least, 
one  at  each  end  of  the 
lay  to  throw  the  shuttle 
to  the  other.  By  Kay's 
invention  one  of  these 
two  men  was  dispensed 
with  and  even  on  nar- 
row weaving  a  weaver 
could  produce  at  least 
twice    as    much     cloth 


J4 


per  day.     No  literature  that  I  have  run  across  gives  any  figures 

of  production  on  the  looms  of  this  period  and  considering  their 
crudeness  in  other  lines,  it  is  perhaps  fair  to  assume  that  they 
could  not  produce  at  a  greater  speed  than  20  picks  per  minute 
before  Kay's  time,  probably  averaging  less.  Kay's  invention 
caused  great  commotion  amongst  the  weaving  trade  and  he  was 
forced  by  persecution  to  leave  the  country.  Cartwright's  power 
loom  patent  was  granted  in  1 7S5 .  Authorities  differ  as  to  the 
success  of  his  first  looms,  some  claiming  that  the  early 
use  was  of  no  importance,  while  others  refer  to  a  mill  of 
500  looms  in  which  Cartwright  was  interested,  as  being 
destroyed  in  1790  by  a  mob  in  sympathy  with  the  hand  loom 
weavers.  Whatever  the  cause,  there  were  as  late  as  1S13  but 
2400  power  looms  in  all  Great  Britain.  The  first  power  loom 
was  introduced  in  Waltham  in  America  in  181  S-  At  this  period 
one  operative  was  required  to  each  loom,  as  they  had  no  weft 
stop  motion  and  no  self  acting  temples,  the  weaver  having  to 
intermittently  move  the  flat  wooden  pieces  with  points  at  the 
end  which  held  the  cloth  extended  at  the  selvage.  The  inven- 
tion of  the  rotary  temple  by  Ira  Draper  in  1S16.  as  developed 
set  eral  years  later,  allowed  the  operative  to  tend  two  looms 
instead  of  one.  The  speed  of  the  common  power  loom  at  this 
time  does  not  seem  to  be  recorded,  but  it  was  probably  between 
So  and  100  picks  per  minute.  In  1820  it  is  figured  that  there 
were  about  15.000  power  looms  in  England  and  Scotland  and  in 
1830  perhaps  60,000.  Even  as  late  as  1840  there  were  said 
to  be  250.000  hand  looms  still  running.  At  this  time  weavers 
in  England  were  not  given  more  than  one  loom  each,  although 
in  America  they  were  running  two  looms,  as  the  English 
manufacturers  did  not  adopt  the  rotary  temple  so  early 
as  our  American  manufacturers.  As  to  the  comparative 
production  of  the  common  looms  at  this  period,  it  is  difficult  to 
find  any  accurate  basis  of  comparison.      Hand  looms  were  weav- 


ing  print  cloth  as  late  as  1896  in  Bohemia,  where  the  production 
figured  on  64  picks  per  inch   in  the  cloth   at  ten   hours  per  day 
would  give  an  average  of  35   picks  per  minute.     I  have  been 
given  figures  of  hand  loom  production  recently  that  would   sug- 
gest a  possible  speed  of  60  picks  per  minute.     About   1840  the 
weft  fork  began  to  he  introduced  and  in  America,  by  1850,  print 
looms  were  running  at  a  speed  of   150  picks  per  minute,  with 
one  operative  tending  four  looms.     Perhaps  they  even  ran  faster 
in  England,  hut  the  operatives  only  tended  two  looms.     From 
this  period  to  1S95  the  plain  loom  was  not  materially  changed  in 
principle,  and  vet  the  perfection  of  detail  had  brought  the  speed 
of  the   American   plain   loom    up   to    190  picks  with  one  good 
weaver  tending  eight  looms,  while  the  English  operative  with 
looms   at   a   speed   of   220   picks   per   minute   was   tending   four 
looms,  though   usually   with   a   helper.     In    1895    the   Northrop 
looms  then  introduced  immediately  allowed  one  weaver  to  run 
16  print  looms  at  190  picks  and  to-day  it  is  assumed  that  a  good 
weaver  with  the  Northrop  loom   on  prints  can  easily  tend   24. 
In  calling  the  speed  of  the  American  print  loom    190  picks  it  is 
not  intended  to  give  a   maximum.     American  print  looms   have 
run  over  200  picks,  hut  such  is  not  the  general  practice.      In  the 
same  way  English   looms   have   run  higher  than    220  picks,  hut 
the  figures  given  are   assumed  as  fair  for  the  purpose  of  com- 
parison and  as  illustrating  the  general  practice. 

Arranging  a  table  of  comparison,  if  we  take  24  Northrop 
looms  at  190  picks  per  minute,  we  have  a  total  of  4560  picks. 
On  the  same  basis,  without  allowance  for  stops,  eight  common 
looms  would  show  1520  picks,  or  four  English  common  looms 
at  220  picks,  880  picks  per  weaver.  The  perfected  hand  loom 
would  show  perhaps  30  to  60.  The  power  loom  of  1S50.  at  150 
picks,  with  four  to  the  operative,  would  show  600  picks  per 
minute,  while  the  loom  of  about  1840,  before  the  weft  fork, 
would  show  with  two   looms   per  weaver  at   perhaps    130    picks 


1 6 


per  minute,  260  picks.  Before  the  temple,  the  loom  at  100 
picks  with  one  loom  per  weaver,  would  give  100  picks,  while 
the  hand  loom  before  Kay  at  20  picks,  the  loom  of  the  middle 
ages  with  a  possible  10  picks,  and  the  loom  of  ancient  history 
with  a  possible  one  pick  per  minute,  brings  our  table  down  to  a 
concrete  illustration,  which,  even  if  faulty  in  detail,  allows  a 
comprehensive  idea  of  the  wonderful  advantages  since  the  earli- 
est application  of  the  art.  The  Northrop  loom  in  eight  years 
has  added  over  3000  picks  per  minute  per  operative  :  the  devel- 
opment since  1850,  920  picks;  the  inventions  from  1830  to  iS^o, 
370  picks:  the  inventions  from  1S20  to  1S30,  130  picks;  the 
inventions  from  Kay  to  1S20  would  add  80  picks,  the  progress 
previous  to  this  time  being  represented  by  20  picks.  It  will 
thus  be  seen  that  within  two  centuries  the  productive  power  of 
the  operative  has  been  increased  22S  times,   and  it  is  also  seen 

that  the  advantages  of  the  Northrop  loom  show 
twice  as  much  in  product  as  all  of  the  other 
inventions  put  together. 

Historv  is  practically  silent  as  to  the  inventors  who  supplied 
the  earlier  devices  employed  on  the  hand  loom.  It  is  not,  there- 
fore, known  who  suggested  the  idea  of  the  harness  motion  with 
its  shifting  heddles,  the  swinging  lay  with  its  reed,  the  take-up 
roll,  the  early  jaw  temple,  and  the  shuttle  itself.  Starting  with 
Kay,  the  development  before  the  Northrop  loom  is  shown  by 
the  following  table,  material  for  which  is  collected  from  stand- 
ard works  on  weaving.  No  attempt  is  made  to  include  the  vari- 
ous inventors  of  fancy  loom  devices,  including  the  jacquard 
motion,  the  dobbv  motion,  and  other  ingenious  developments. 
It  might  be  well,  however,  to  note  that  the  earliest  mechanism 
for  fancy  weaving;  namely,  the  drop  box.  was  invented  by 
Robert  Kay.  son  of  John,  in  1760.  In  preparing  the  table  it 
has  also  been  thought  well  to  limit  the  inventions  to  show  only 
the    anticipation    of    the    general    principles    employed.       It    is 


'7 


impossible  to  properly  note  any  l>ut  the  pioneer  inventors,  and 
the  dates  given  are  usuall)  those  of  their  patents.  Verj  possi- 
bly more  credit  is  due  other  inventors  not  mentioned,  for  their 
perfection  of  ideas  that  otherwise  would  not  have  been  useful. 

17^.      Fly  shuttle.  John  Kay. 

1786.     Power  loom.  Edmund  Cartwright. 

(First  suggestion  of  warp-stop-motion,  weft-stop-motion, 
positive  let-off  and  take-up.) 

1796.  Over-pick,  hinder,  protector,  and  frog,  Richard 
( rorton. 

1796.      Ratchet  take-up.   Rohert  Miller. 

[803.      Shedding  motion,  John  Todd. 

1S10.     Revolving  temple,  Ira  Draper. 

[821.     Multiple  harness  motion.  Robert  Bowman. 

1828.  Complete  power  loom  with  modern  over-pick, 
William   I  Hckinson. 

1830.     Complete  power  loom,  Richard  Roberts. 

(These  two  instances  of  complete  power  looms  are  men- 
tioned as  showing  a  general  development  oi  ideas  not  noted  in 
detail,  which  together  produced  practical  weaving  machines.  ) 

[831.      Weft  fork,  claimed  by  Clinton  G.  Gilroy. 

1834.  First  shuttle-changer,  John  Patterson  Reid  and 
Thomas  Johnson. 

[834.     Weft  fork,  claimed  by  Ramsbottom  and  Holt. 

1S38.      Picker  check.   Rohert  Pickles. 

1S40.     Improved  temple.  George  Draper. 

1841.  Weft  fork  improvements,  William  Kenworth)  and 
lames  Bullough. 

1S42.      Loose  reed.  James  Bullough. 

1545.  Loom  brake,  John  Sellers. 

1546.  Parallel  shuttle-motion  for  under-pick  loom.  War- 
ren W.  Dutcher. 


tS 


[851.  Reciprocating  temple,  Elihu  and  Warren  \\  . 
Dutcher. 

1857.     Automatic  let-off,  Snell  and  Bartlett. 

[859.      Rocker  motion.  W.  Stearns. 

1863.      Loose  frog,  George  Draper. 

1867.     Double  beam  let-off,  Cottrell  and  Draper  (George). 

186S.     Practical  self -threading  shuttle,  J.  A.  Metcalf. 

r868.      Broad  loom   shuttle-motion.  J.  Lvall. 

1S69.      Inside  catch  shuttle.  J.  II.  Cohnrn. 

There  is  quite  a  lapse  between  1870  and  1890  in  which  no 
vcrv  important  patents  on  plain  looms  were  granted.  In  fact. 
looms  made  before  18^0  continued  running  for  years  in  compe- 
tition with  those  built  long  after,  the  more  modern  looms  not 
showing  any  notable  advantage,  except  perhaps  in  heavier  con- 
struction and  higher  possible  speed.  It  must  be  remembered 
that  I  am  still  referring  to  the  plain,  common  loom,  not  in  any 
way  intending  to  disparage  the  remarkable  advance  in  the  range 
of  fancy  loom  devices  in  that  period,  including  the  hair-cloth 
loom,  pile  fabric  loom,  tape  loom,  etc..  etc.,  etc. 

Owing  to  an  error  in  the  index  of  the  official  British  publi- 
cation of  Abridgements  of  the  .Specifications  relating  to  Weav- 
ing, it  was  only  recently  that  we  discovered  the  first  patent  in 
which  the  idea  of  changing  shuttles  automatically  is  referred  to. 
Such  a  reference  occurs  in  that  granted  John  Patterson  Reid 
and  Thomas  Johnson.  No.  6^79,  in  the  British  Patent  Office, 
dated  March  20,  1834.  The  specification  refers  to  a  number  of 
different  inventions,  contemplating  the  weaving  ol  four  webs  of 
cloth  at  once  in  a  vertical  loom.  It  shows  a  mechanism  de- 
signed to  change  the  shuttles  when  any  one  weft  thread  breaks. 
or  fails,  the  substitution  occurring  by  an  instantaneous  move- 
ment, without  any  act  of  the  attendant,  and  without  stopping 
the  loom,  tlie  mechanism  being  brought  into  action  by  a  weft 
stopper  annexed  to  the  shuttle.      The  specification  also    refers    to 


changing  shuttle  boxes  to  bring  different  colored  weft  into 
action.  It  also  contains  a  jacquard  mechanism.  Both  Reid  and 
Johnson  were  prolific  inventors,  Johnson  having  taken  out  a 
patent  as  early  as  [803,  lor  a  dressing  machine,  and  Reid  as 
early  as  1827.  for  a  lay  motion.  Johnson  and  Reid  together 
took  out  several  other  patents  for  less  interesting  improvements. 

The  discovery  of  the  Reid  and  Johnson  patent  of  1834 
displaces  a  former  claimant ;  namely,  Charles  Parker,  who  took 
out  an  English  patent  in  1840  for  a  very  similar  combination. 
The  next  invention  in  this  line  is  of  the  year  18^2.  Meanwhile, 
however,  Mr.  Clinton  G.  Gilroy  issued  his  noted  work  on  weav- 
ing in  1844,  in  which  in  a  satirical  and  humorous  vein,  he  refers 
to  the  loom  of  Arphaxad,  explained  to  Deioces,  the  first  king  of 
the  Medes.      In  the  description  of  this  loom  it  states  : 

"In  order  to  avoid  stopping  the  motion  of  the  loom  when  one  or 
more  of  the  weft  threads  break,  or  become  exhausted,  a  few  span- 
shuttles  are  to  be  lodged  in  suitable  receptacles,  which  are  so  arrange,/ 
that  the  mere  breaking  of  a  weft  thread  will  cause  a  change  of  shut- 
tle instantaneously  (by  the  substitution  of  a  spare  one  in  its  stead )." 

The  detail  of  the  operation  is  described  at  some  length  : 
also  the  mechanism  by  which  the  loom  will  stop,  supposing  the 
total  number  of  shuttles  to  he  exhausted.  He  also  describes  a 
shuttle-changer  for  application  to  different  colors  of  weft  yarn 
to  produce  patterns  in  the  cloth.  The  operation  of  the  change 
ot"  filling  is  similar  to  that  in  the  Reid  &  Johnson  and  Parker 
patents,  the  details  seeming  to  show  that  the  author  was  well 
acquainted  with  the  Reid  &  Johnson  patent,  and  possibly  the 
Parker  patent  also.  Gilroy's  reference  is  merely  an  indirect 
satire  on  our  patent  system,  though  many  of  his  readers  have 
since  taken  this  part  of  his  work  seriously.  Gilroy  himself  was 
an  inventor  of  considerable  prominence  in  the  weaving  line, 
and  must  have  considered  the  idea  of  changing  filling  too  chi- 
merical to  be  practically  developed. 


20 


Fig.  20 — Roberts  Loom. 


>ide  Elevation. 


In  our  earliest  public  reference  to  the  Northrop  loom,  name- 
ly, that  quoted  in  the  paper  of  our  Mr.  George  (  Hi-  Draper. 
read  before  the  New  England  Cotton  Manufacturer-"  Associa- 
tion, at  their  meeting  in  Atlanta.  October.  1895,  it  was  stated 
that  loom-  rested  while  improvement-  changed  the  form  of 
other  cotton  machinery,  -'plain  weaving  remaining  in  its  element- 
ary stage  "  Abo.  "No  radical  change  in  any  vital  feature  can  be 
shown    as    the    result  of  the   last  fifty    years."       These     remarks 


awakened  some  comment  and  criticism,  calling  forth  a 
reference  in  our  circular,  The  Advance  of  tJtc  Northrop  Loom, 
to  the  loom  manufactured  by  Richard  Roberts  in  [830.  We 
now  .show  a  print  of  this  loom,  which  was  sixty-five  years  old 
at  the  time  of  the  Atlanta  meeting,  and  call  attention  to  the  fact 
that  its  genera]  design  and  equipment  is  very  similar  to  that  of 
common  looms  at  the  time  of  the  introduction  of  the  Northrop 
improvements.  Practically  all  of  the  important  elements  of 
plain  weaving  are  shown  in  precisely  the  same  relative  positions 
which  they  now  occupy :  in  fact,  the  weft  fork  is  the  only 
notable  omission. 


Other  authorities   have    since    added    testimony    of    similar 

sort  : — 

"It  may  safely  he  asserted  that  at  the  present  time  no  subject  is 
receiving  more  careful  consideration  than  that  of  weaving.  In  its 
essentials  the  power  loom  has  changed  little  since  the  date  of  its  inven- 
tion. It  has  heen  made  heavier,  the  details  of  the  let-off"  and  the  take- 
up  and  the  numerous  other  parts  have  heen  changed  in  their  degree  of 
efficiency,  hut  little  in  their  method  of  operation.  Vet  from  the  hegin- 
Ding  of  the  century  it  has  heen  clearly  foreseen  that  a  most  radical 
change  in  weaving  would  take  place  upon  the  invention  of  a  simple  and 
efficient  weft  supplying  mechanism." — [Henry  I.  Harriman  nt  tin  Boston 
meeting  <>t  tin  X.  /■;'.  Cot.  Man.  Assn..  April  26.  1900. 


The    incompleteness    of   the   earlier   automatic    looms  is  also 
verified  : — 

"In  the  case  of  weft  supplying  looms  the  difficulty  of  transferring 
such  a  large  body  as  a  shuttle,  in  the  very  short  period  of  time  given 
between  picks,  prevented  their  genera]  use.  The  process  was  destruc- 
tive both  to  the  loom  and  the  shuttle,  and  it  is  safe  to  say  that  none  of 
these  numerous  inventions  was  ever  put  to  practical  use." — [//.  /.  Har- 
riman at  Boston  meeting  of  tin-  X.  E.  Cot.  Man.  Assn..  April  26,  1900. 

"But  following  187<>  there  was  a  very  general  absence  of  work  on 
automatic  looms  until  there  appeared  that  remarkable  series  of  inven- 
tions perfected  by  the  Diaper  Company." — [_H  1.  Harriman  at  Boston 
meeting  of  th(  X.  E.  Cot.  Man.  Assn..  April  26,  1900. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  NORTHROP  LOOM. 

In  order  to  avoid  the  usually  inevitable  misstatements  made 
years  afterward  concerning  the  early  conception  and  introduc- 
tion of  important  inventions,  we  will  briefly  record  the  perti- 
nent facts  concerning-  the  early  history  of  the  Northrop  loom. 

The  predecessors  of  our  present  Company  started  as  far 
back  as  [816,  to  perfect  the  power  loom.  Ira  Draper  inventing 
the  revolving  temple  at  this  period.  At  the  formation  of  the 
partnership  of  George  Draper  &  Son  in  186S.  the  business  con- 
trolled by  this  firm  and  other  Hopedale  companies  chiefly  rela- 
ted to  loom  improvements,  including  let-off  motions,  parallel 
motions,  thin-place  preventers,  loose  frogs,  etc.  The  ring  and 
spindle  inventions,  however,  coming  in  soon  after,  assumed 
such  prominence  that  the  loom  department  became  a  secondary 
feature.  The  members  of  the  firm,  however,  often  speculated 
on  the  possible  advantages  of  automatic  weaving,  considering 
this  as  a  possible  Held  for  future  development. 

On  July  26,  iSSS.  Mr.  William  F.  Draper,  Jr..  heard  of  a 
loom  invention  in  Providence,  and  -aw  the  inventors  and  their 
device,  which  was  an  automatic  shuttle-changer.  lie  reported 
at  home  that  the  general  idea  was  interesting,  hut  the  device  not 
practical,  in  hi-  opinion.  Our  firm  then  had  an  exhaustive  in- 
vestigation of  the  patent  situation  made  through  competent 
counsel.  The  report  seemed  to  show  that  there  was  little 
novelty  in  this  special  application  of  the  idea,  hut  the  firm 
had  become  sufficiently  interested  to  risk  a  further  trial  of 
the  general  principle,  and  on  December  10th  voted  a  sum  of 
Si  0.000  for  experiment-,  and  started  an  inventor.  Mr.  Alonzo 
E.  Rhoades,  on  the  task  of  devising  a  practical  shuttle-changing 
loom.      That  Mr.  Rhoades    lost    no    time    is   proved    by  the    fact 


23 


that  he  had  an  operative  loom  read}  to  be  started,  with  warp 
and  filling,  by  February  28th  of  i8Sg,  This  loom,  after  being 
reconstructed  with  new  patterns  during  the  next  few  months. 
though  not  changed  in  principle,  ran  with  good  success.  Some 
twelve  years  later,  for  purposes  of  patent  litigation,  the  same 
loom  was  started  up  and  run  for  days  under  the  eye  of  a  patent 
expert,  accomplishing  its  purpose  so  well  as  to  draw  forth  his 
unqualified  approval. 

Leaving  the  Rhoades  loom  at  this  stage,  it  is  necessan  to 
retrace  our  history  to  the  year  1857.  when  Mr.  James  II.  North- 
rop was  horn  in  Keighley,  England,  on  May  8th  of  that  year. 
After  becoming  an  expert  mechanic  and  factory  foreman  in  his 
own  country.  Mr.  Northrop  came  to  this  side  in  May,  [881, 
soon  drifting  to  Hopedale,  where  he  became  employed  as  an 
expert  on  metal  patterns.  His  invention  of  the  Northrop  Spool- 
er Guide  brought  him  to  the  notice  of  his  employers,  and  he 
was  selected  by  them  to  work  out  the  idea  of  an  automatic  knot- 
tier for  spoolers.  Although  showing  great  ingenuity,  the 
devices  did  not  appear  commercially  practical,  and  the  inventor 
became  sufficiently  discouraged  to  abandon  the  shop  and  devote 
his  time  to  farming.  Not  finding  this  occupation  congenial,  he 
applied  for  employment  some  years  later,  in  the  fall  of  [888, 
hut  the  only  opening  then  present  was  a  job  as  mechanic  at  $2 
per  day.  In  February,  Northrop,  who  had  noted  the  progress 
of  the  Rhoades  idea,  spoke  to  Mr.  George  Otis  Draper,  who 
had  just  entered  the  firm  of  George  Draper  &  Sons,  stating  that 
it  given  a  chance  he  could  put  a  shuttle-changer  on  a  loom  in 
one  week's  time,  that  could  he  made  in  quantities  for  a  cost  ,,f 
$1  each.  On  March  5th.  Mr.  Draper  drove  to  his  farm  and  saw  a 
rough  wooden  model  of  his  idea,  which  was  set  up  in  his  hen- 
house. At  Mr.  Draper's  recommendation,  the  firm  ordered  an- 
other loom  Eor  experiments,  and  after  its  arrival  Mr.  Northrop 
was  started  on  April  8th  to  work  out  his  scheme.      By  Mav  20th 


24 


he  had  concluded  that  his  first  idea  was  not  practical,  and  having 
meanwhile  thought  out  a  new  plan,  he  asked  for  an  extension  of 
time  until  the  fourth  of  July  in  which  to  perfect  it.  On  July  sth. 
the  completed  loom  was  running  at  speed,  and  as  it  seemed  to 
involve  more  advantages  than  the  Rhoades  pattern,  the  weaver 
was  taken  off  of  the  Rhoades  loom  and  transferred  to  the  North- 
rop. On  Octoher  24th  a  loom  with  new  construction,  from 
revised  patterns,  was  running  at  the  Seaconnet  Mill  in  Fall 
River,  and  more  looms  of  the  same  kind  were  started  up  there- 
at intervals.  Mr.  Northrop  had.  however,  meanwhile  thought 
out  his  idea  of  changing  filling  in  the  shuttle,  some  of  the  parts 
of  such  a  mechanism  taking  shape  as  early  as  October.  The 
development  at  our  works  continued  so  favorably  that  by  April 
of  1S90  a  lot  of  filling-changing  looms  were  started  in  the  same 
Seaconnet  Mill,  the  shuttle-changing  looms  having  been  changed 
back  to  common  looms,  in  view  of  the  additional  advantages  of 
the  filling-changing  pattern. 

To  show  the  situation  at  this  period   we   quote  from  a  letter 
sent  a  prominent  mill  official  May  isj,  1890: 

"Replying  to  your  favor  of  the  14th  hist,  would  say  that  we  are  get- 
ting along  as  rapidly  as  we  could  hope  or  expect  with  our  new  shuttle 
patent,  considering  the  fact  that  we  are  doing  what  seemed  to  be  a  very 
difficult  thing  and  reaching  out  into  a  field  where  we  have  nothing  to 
guide  us. 

We  are  now  running  12  looms  in  a  mill  constantly.  They  are  pro- 
ducing from  5  per  cent,  to  10  per  cent,  more  per  loom  than  other  looms 
in  the  same  mill  and  are  all  making  first-class  cloth.  We  have  not  yet 
fully  tested  them  to  see  how  great  a  reduction  we  can  make  in  the  num- 
ber of  weavers.     This  we  are  proposing  to  do  at  the  earliest  moment. 

We  do  not  feel  at  liberty  to  change  one  or  more  looms  for  you  at  the 
present  time  and  in  explanation  will  map  out  to  you  our  proposed  course 
and  we  think  you  will  agree  with  us  that  our  policy  is  a  wise  one. 

What  we  intend  to  do  is  to  perfect  by  practically  running  as  long  as 
seems  necessary  these  12  looms  before  making  or  trying  any  more. 
When  we  have  perfected  these  12  looms  we  propose  to  put  in  100  or  200 
looms  and  when  these  100  or  200  looms  are  running  to  our  entire  satis- 
faction we  shall  hope  to  apply  the  invention  to  the  entire  mill.  When 
the  entire  mill  is  running  to  our  satisfaction  we  shall  then  be  very 
anxious  to  try  our  inventions  at  other  places. 

Our  reasons  for  adopting  this  course  are,  first,  we  want  to  devote 
nil  our  time  and  energy  and  inventive  capacity  to  perfect  the  desigJi  in 


one  place  so  as  to  be  sure  we  shall  make  a  success  of  it  there.  We  be- 
llf^rf  ihat  in  this  vv;ly  weshal1  be  able  to  put  the  invention  on  3000  or 
4000  looms  or  10.000  looms  much  more  quickly  and  satisfactorily  than 
in  any  other  way." 

Attempts  have  been  made  by  interested  parties  to  show  that 
these  earlier  trials  were  experimental  in  character,  and  produc- 
tive of  nothing  practical  at  the  time.  Such,  however,  was  nol 
the  case.  These  earlier  trials,  both  of  shuttle-changer  and  fill- 
ing-changer, showed  practically  operative  mechanisms,  winch 
were  run  on  many  looms  weaving  cloth  lor  the  regular  mill 
product,  with  the  regular  mill  help;  in  fact,  when  we  trans- 
ferred our  trial  of  mechanisms  from  Fall  River  to  another  mill 
centre,  the  looms  which  we  left  were  run  for  months  by  the  mill 
help  without  superintendence  on  our  part,  and  without  even  a 
casual  inspection  by  any  of  our  men. 

We  left  the  twelve  looms  running  under  the  normal  super- 
vision of  the  mill  management  in  March.  1891.  To  show  how 
well  these  early  mechanisms  did  their  work  we  quote  from  the 
following  letter  received  from  the  overseer  of  the  room  June  27. 
1891  :— 

_     "I  am  proud  to  inform  you  that  there  lias  not  been  a  mishap  of  any 
kind  tins  week.     The  looms  are  weaving  faster  than  the  spinning  frame 

can  spin.     Mr. seems  surprised  to  see  the  weavers  standing  at  the 

end  or  the  frame  waiting  for  the  doners  and  their  Looms  stopped. 
Notwithstanding  having  to  wait  so  many  times  for  filling,  the  produc- 
tion for  the  week  ending  27th  is  seventy-eight  I  78  I  cuts."  ' 

We  found  it  would  be  necessary  to  build  complete  new 
looms  in  order  to  derive  the  best  results  from  the  new  mechan- 
isms. This  required  an  entire  equipment  of  the  necessan  tools 
and  a  considerable  enlargement  in  plant,  as  we  had  never  been 
loom  builders.  We  also  found  that  it  was  advisable  to  develop 
a  practical  warp-stop-motion  for  use  with  the  filling-changer, 
and  this  of  itself"  delayed  the  introduction  of  the  loom  for  sev- 
eral years.  We  ran  into  annoying  mechanical  difficulties,  it 
requiring  a   long  time  to  solve  the   apparently  simple   problem 


of  tempering  the  shuttle  springs  so  that  they  would  not  break. 
Even  with  the  loom  complete  in  every  detail,  vve  were  not  reach- 
to  take  large  orders  until  we  had  equipped  a  weave  room  of  our 
own  and  run  it  continuously  for  mam    months. 

To  go  into  further  detail  and  cover  the  entire  ground  would 
require  more  space  than  can  now  be  afforded.  The  further  eon- 
tents  ot  this  hook  may  aid  in  giving  a  proper  conception  of  the 
further  development ;  and  yet  the  finished  products  shown  con- 
vey no  intimation  of  the  countless  experiments  and  trials  of 
devices  which  have  not  entered  into  the  accepted  combination. 
Many  of  these  are  shown  in  our  voluminous  patents;  others  are 
still  unhonored.  They  all  form  a  part  of  the  unwritten  story, 
however,  and  often  might  furnish  interesting  chapters. 

Our  manner  of  developing  improvements  is  outlined  in  the 
paper  of  Gen.  Draper  delivered  before  the  Xew  England  Cotton 
Manufacturers'  Association   on  April  22,  1903. 

"Our  routine  lias  been,  firstly,  to  run  a  Dumber  of  loom-  experi- 
mentally in  a  room  in  our  shop,  and  by  means  of  special  observers,  in 
addition  to  the  weavers,  to  note  results  in  detail.  These  results  are 
collated  in  daily  reports,  which  are  preserved  for  study  and  reference. 
Notes  are  made  of  everything  outside  of  perfect  weaving-,  the  breakage, 
wear  or  slipping  of  parts,  the  failure  of  mechanism  to  act  every  lime  as 
intended,  imperfections  in  the  cloth,  like  chick  or  thin  places,  the  num- 
ber of  warp  and  tilling  threads  broken  and  why  they  break,  if  it  can  be 
known.  After  studying  these  reports  in  connection  with  personal  ob- 
servation of  the  running  looms,  changes  are  made,  with  a  view  to  im- 
provement it  possible.  Pieces  that  break  are  Strengthened,  or  strains 
are  removed;  parts  that  slip  are  more  securely  fastened ;  and  wear  is 
ob\iated  where  it  seems  possible. 

Xew  devices  are  suggested  to  obviate  cloth  imperfections,  or  break- 
age of  warp  or  filling,  of  bobbins  or  shuttles.  The  new  parts  are  made 
and  tested  in  comparison  with  the  old  ones,  and  nine  times  out  of  ten 
they  don't  work  as  well.  Perhaps  they  don't  overcome  the  difficulty; 
perhaps  in  overcoming  it  they  introduce  new  ones.  After  one  failure 
comes  another  attempt,  and  as  a  rule  another  failure,  but  something  is 
learned  from  each  trial  and  the  general  course  is  towards  improvement. 

The  worst  troubles  to  find  and  cure  are  those  that  are  intermittent 
and  infrequent.  A  device  will  work  as  intended  a  hundred  or  a  thou- 
sand times.  Then  it  tails  once  from  Bome  unknown  cause:  then  it  goes 
on  all  right  as  before.  <>ne  seldom  or  never  sees  the  failure  except  in 
result,  and  if  it  happens  before  one's  very  eyes  the  motions  of  the  loom 
are  too  rapid  to  make  eyesight  of  much  advantage,  one  can  only  rea- 
son in  these  cases  and.  as  in  some  other  matters,  unassisted  reason  with- 


-7 

"in  sufficient  data  comes  pretty  near  being  a  guess.  However,  guess  we 
lim~'  '"•  let  the  defect  continue,  and  in  some  cases  we  have  guessed 
right.     In  others  we  are  still  guessing. 

After  we  reach  what  seems  a  real  improvement  on  one  Loom,  we 

try  it  on  a  dozen,  i -e  or  Less,  and  keep  records  for  a  month  or  two. 

Here  again  disappointment  often  comes  in  and  we  return  to  fresh  Btudy 
and  experiment.  If.  however,  the  advance  proves  real  we  oexl 
arrange  a  mill  test ;  that  is,  we  till  an  order,  or  a  part  of  an  order,  for 
looms  with  the  new  device,  and  submit  it  to  the  tender  mercies  of  those 
win  have  to  run  it  practically  and  without  any  special  interest  beyond 
••day-pay  and  Saturday  night." 

This  kills  many  an  infant  invention  that  would  be  of  value  if  prop- 
erly cared  for.  No  oew  device  in  minor  detail  can  succeed  in  the  mill  if 
it  causes  extra  trouble,  even  if  it  does  better  work :  and  if  any  new 
adjustment-  are  introduced,  they  are  almost  sure  to  introduce  wrong  set- 
ting. Lack  of  adjustment  induces  filing  and  chipping  to  attain  positions 
that  our  experiments  have  shown  to  be  wrong,  but  the  fixers  have  not 
been  through  the  experimenting  and  sometimes  want  to  make  improve- 
ments themselves.  Cams  that  have  been  carefully  worked  out  have 
been  filed  or  ground  so  that  they  would  not  work  as  intended  and  the 
device  has  been  condemned,  and  in  more  than  one  instance  operating 
parts  have  been  cut  off  with  a  cold  chisel  and  the  new  device  pronounced 
valueless.  l 

After  this  experience  we  re-design,  simplify  and  try  to  make  the 
new  arrangement  easier  to  run  than  the  old.  and  if  we  succeed  and 
accomplish  the  original  design,  we  have  made  a  step  forward. 

It  is  fair  to  say  that  from  these  mill  tests  we  often  gel  ideas  ol 
^'ieat  practical  value  from  intelligent  operators,  who  see  necessities  that 
had  not  occurred  to  us.  more  than  enough,  perhaps,  to  offset  the  stupid 
condemnation  of  others  who  do  not  appreciate  fine  points  and  never 
will  until  they  have  become  a  part  of  their  regular  drill,  and  only  then 
because  if  they  can't  make  a  machine  run.  there  are  plenty  of  Others 
u  no  know  how  to  do  it.'" 

Perhaps  nothing  in  the  line  of  histon  is  more  significant 
than  our  various  statements  published  in  the  way  of  advertise- 
ments in  trade  papers.  The  whole  of  anticipation,  progress 
and  realization  is  thus  set  down  as  it  was,  or  assumed  to  be,  at 
the  tune.  Those  that  follow  arc  actual  quotations  From  publica- 
tions of   the  years  mentioned. 


28 


iS95. 

"We  believe  that  certain  improvements  we  are  soon  to  in- 
troduce will  divide  the  cost  of  weaving  by  two  on  all  plain 
goods. 

We  have  a  complete  weave  room  of  eightv  looms  running 
on  print  cloth,  which  is  open  to  the  inspection  of  interested 
manufacturers." 

''It  is  a  grave  question  whether  we  should  invite  more 
(loom)  orders  under  the  circumstances.  A  success  may  prove 
embarrassing  when  it  comes  so  suddenly." 

"Textile  workers  should  be  interested  in  all  inventions  that 
make  their  labor  easier,  cleaner  or  healthier. 

What  is  more  unclean  or  unhealthv  than  the  now  necessary 
process  of  sucking  rilling  through  a  shuttle  eye  ? 

We  are  introducing  a  loom  which  automatically  threads  the 
shuttle  without  labor  on  the  part  of  the  weaver.  This  loom 
also  prevents  damage  to  the  cloth,  caused  by  broken  warp 
threads." 

"Many  persons  are  disappointed  in  the  Northrop  Loom 
because  it  does  not  produce  finished  goods  at  one  end  from  a 
bale  of  cotton  led  into  a  hopper  at  the  other  side." 

"We  believe  a  purchase  of  common  looms  a  grave  error  at 
the  present  day." 


1S96. 

••A  mill  that  orders  common  looms  at  the  present  time  de- 
liberately handicaps  its  future  prospect-." 

"We  now  recommend  this  (Northrop)  loom  and  stake  our 
reputation  on  its  success." 

"The   majority  believe   in  progress.     They  favor  inventions 


that  relieve  human  labor  by  transferring  operations  from  fingers 
to  levers  and  cams.     The  Northrop  Loom  is  of  this  class." 

"We  do  not  have  to  reply  on  assertion.  Thousands  of 
(Northrop)  looms  are  in  actual  use  testifying  to  their  own 
merit." 

"We  have  had  additional  orders  already  from  six  of  the  first 
ten  mills  supplied." 

"Consign  your  common  looms  to  the  scrap  heap  where 
they  belong,  and  equip  with  machines  that  will  earn  a  profit." 


1897. 

"The  Northrop  Loom  is  now  an  Unquestioned  Success  on 
all  plain  cotton  fabrics.  .  .  .  We  have  never  had  a  more 
positive  conviction.     This  Loom  must  be  adopted." 

"When  mills  like  the  Pacific  and  Tremont  &  Suffolk  throw 
out  common  looms  for  New  Northrop  Looms,  the  question  of 
success  is  solved. 

Before  the  year  is  over  the  Amoskeag  Mfg.  Co.  will  have 
nearly  10,000  looms  changed  to  take  our  motions." 

••Weavers  on  all  common  looms  choke  their  lungs  with  cot- 
ton fibre.  When  the  filling  is  colored  the  effect  is  more  or  less 
poisonous,  and  in  either  case  the  health  is  undermined." 

"It  is  commercial  suicide  to  buy  a  common  loom  in  the  face 
of  facts  easily  known  and  proved." 

"Why  not  return  to  hand  looms  and  get  a  cheap  equipment, 
also  giving  more-  laborers  employment?" 


1S98. 
'What  would  you  think  of  a   loom    that  requires  but   half 


the    labor,  weaves   more   perfect    cloth   and    will    run   over   time 
without  need  tor  attention? 

\\  ould  von  buy  it  at  a  price  that  makes  it  the  cheapest  ma- 
chine ever  put  in  your  mill,  or  would  you  wait,  and  doubt,  and 
doubt  and  wait,  until  the  competition  ol"  the  enterprising  forced 
you  into  line  at  the  rear  of   the   procession?" 

"Adverse  criticism  has  often  killed  a  good  idea  in  it- 
infancy  while  it-  strength  was  not  equal  to  the  struggle.  We 
escaped  the  fate  which  many  prophesied." 

••The  only  hope  for  our  cotton  mills  in  these  critical  times 
lies  in  the  prompt  adoption  of  improved  machinery. 
It  may  he  urged  that  if  all  mills  put  in  new  machinery  they  will 
-imply  be  back  at  the  old  competitive  level — very  true — but  they 
will  not  all  do  it.  Therein  lies  the  chance  for  profit  for  those 
who  have  the  necessary  courage,  capital,  or  happy  combination 
of  both." 

•"The  doubters  and  the  skeptics  are  not  yet  silenced — they 
never  will  be.  Some  of  them  still  think  it  a  great  mistake  for 
mills  to  use  high  -peed  spindles,  filling  frames  and  revoking  flat 
cards.  We  have  no  time  to  waste  on  their  conviction,  as  their 
species  must  yield  to  the  natural  law — the  survival  of  the  fittest." 


1899. 

"The  mills  that  refuse  their  opportunities  will  find  their 
future  utility  serving  a-  picturesque  ruins  in  the  landscape." 

■•If  old  mills  stand  in  timid  dread  on  the  brink  ol'  indeci- 
sion the  new  mills  will  crowd  them  over  the  edge." 

"You  can  feel  assured  that  merit  is  recognized  when  the 
copyist  appears — but  you  don't  want  a  cop}  ." 

"Let  us  then  renew   the  assurances  of  our  distinguished  con- 


3' 


sideration,  while  we   devote  our  energies   to   rilling  the   orders 
with  which  we  have  been  Eavored." 


1900. 

"The  greater  part  of  the  cloth  woven  in  this  country  is 
made  on  plain  looms.  We  have  devoted  about  10  years  to  the 
perfection  of  the  plain  loom  and  have  now  made  it  automatic 
and  self-protecting  against  errors." 

"We  intend  to  keep  up  with  the  demand  for  our  machiner) 
if  we  have  to  roof  in  the  whole  town." 

"A  new  common  loom  in  a  Southern  cotton  mill  is  now  a 
curiosity." 

"We  are  battling  with  nature,  filling  ponds,  diverting  river 
channels,  raising  valleys,  etc..  to  make  room  on  which  to  con- 
tinue extensions." 

"We  still  solicit  orders  in  the  confidence  that  bricks  and 
lumber  may  he  obtained  in  sufficient  quantity  to  house  our  in- 
crease of   plant." 

••Win'  ship  cotton  to  Europe  when  mills  at  home  can  man- 
ufacture it  moie  profitably  now  that  improved  machinery  gives 
them  another  advantage?" 

'•The  great  development  of  the  Southern  cotton  mill  system 
started  with  the  Northrop  loom  and  the  continued  association  ot 
the  two  tonus  an  interesting  object  lesson." 

"We  melt  100  tons  of  iron  per  day  to  make  the  castings  for 
our  Northrop  looms,  etc.  But  that  is  not  enough.  Enlarge- 
ments still  in  progress." 

••We  have  now  sold  over  60,000  Northrop  looms.  We  are 
shipping  1  soo  a  month  and  enlarging  our  works  to  increase  that 
output.     We  are  employing  2^00  men  and  shall   great!}  increase 


32 


this  force  when  new  shops  are  ready.  And  what  does  this  all 
mean?  Simply  that  the  success  of  the  Northrop  loom  is  astound- 
ing, even  those  who  have  held  their  faith." 

"The  steady  progress  of  the  Northrop  loom  is  a  certain  evi- 
dence of  its  merit.  Adverse  criticism  has  often  killed  a  good 
idea  in  its  infancy  while  its  strength  was  not  equal  to  the  strug- 
gle. We  escaped  the  fate  that  many  prophesied.  Our  loom  has 
passed  the  trial  stage." 

"Let  all  who  favor  progress  unite  in  placing  American  cot- 
ton mills  where  they  can  compete  with  foreign  countries  without 
reducing  their  labor  scale  to  the  standard  set  in  England,  Ger- 
many, Russia,  India,  China,  Japan  and  other  outside  manufac- 
turing sections." 

"We  build  the  famous  Northrop  Loom.  It  is  also  manu- 
factured by  our  licensees  in  Canada,  Germany,  France  and 
Switzerland.  Four  of  these  looms  are  running  at  the  Paris 
Exposition,  attracting  wide  attention." 

"The  successful  development  of  our  loom  gives  a  mill  a 
chance  of  making  a  great  saving  in  its  expenses  without  increas- 
ing the  labor  or  responsibility  of  the  management,  and  by  reduc- 
tion of  the  number  of  employes  it  actually  lessens  the  invest- 
ment necessary  for  tenements  and  the  labor  used  in  paying  off 
and  supervising.  The  possible  profit  from  a  Northrop  loom 
mill  will  pay  good  dividends  when  a  competing  mill  with  com- 
mon looms  is  not  able  to  show  more  than  an  even  balance.  Mills 
have  been  prompt  to  take  advantage  of  improved  machinery  in 
the  past,  as  they  universally  use  high-speed  spindles  and  are  thor- 
oughly committed  to  the  revolving  top  flat  card.  Neither  of 
these  changes,  however,  can  show  more  than  a  fraction  of  the 
profit  possible  with  our  loom,  for  the  saving  in  weaving  is  more 
than  the  entire  cost  of  carding  with  the  picker-room  thrown  in, 
and  more  than  the  entire  cost  of  spinning." 

"New   mills  are  flooding  us  with  orders,  and  old   mills   must 


33 


realize  that  equality  in  competition   demands  equality  of  equip- 
ment." 

"We  used  to  claim  that  weavers  could  attend  Northrop 
Looms  in  the  proportion  of  two  to  one  common.  The  users  are 
finding  this  prediction  far  too  moderate  as  they  often  run  three 
to  four  times  their  former  limit.  In  several  mills  weavers  are 
paid  less  than  one-half  the  former  price  for  weaving  cloth  pei- 
cut,  and  yet  make  higher  wages  than  when  running  common 
looms. 

A  mill  that  cannot  appreciate  that  statement  simply  cannot 
appreciate  the  tale  told  by  concrete  figures.  Those  who  attempt 
to  sell  cloth  handicapped  by  an  extra  cost  of  from  one  cent  per 
pound  upward,  can  cling  to  their  obsolete  common  looms  while 
their  more  enterprising  neighbors  glean  the  profits." 

'AVe  begin  to  feel  quite  independent  in  our  loom  trade,  as 
the  results  of  experience  have  proved  that  our  position  is  abso- 
lutely unassailable.  A  few  facts  speak  for  themselves:  (;()(),1 
weavers  running  24  to  32  print  looms  and  20  3-harness  looms." 

"In  one  large  print  mill  the  average  number  of  looms  per 
weaver  is  18." 

"We  are  employing  more  hands  than  ever  worked  before  in 
an  American  Cotton  Machine  Shop  and  are  enlarging  our  plant 
in  every  direction." 

"Every  new  idea  meets  the  same  opposition,  goes  through 
the  same  routine.  In  the  first  few  years  this  machine  had  to 
bear  the  brunt  of  criticism,  antagonism,  doubt,  fear,  and  mis- 
representation. Now  it  suddenly  sweeps  away  opposition,  flood- 
ing us  with  orders,  and  necessitating  the  doubling  of  our  plant. 
We  intend  to  keep  abreast  of  the  demand  if  pig  iron  and  steel 
can  be  obtained  in  sufficient  quantity." 

"It  is  an  interesting  problem  to  note  how  much  longer  the 
old  mills  can  continue  competition,  when  handicapped  by  the 
obsolete  common  loom." 


34 


1 90 1 . 

"With  a  record  of  7^.000  looms  sold,  it  is  no  longer  neces- 
sary for  US  to  predict  what  these  looms  will  do. 

We  point  to  what  they  have  done." 

"Although  our  order  list  lengthens  and  strengthens,  we  do 
not  adopt  the  simple  and  inexpensive  plan  of  building  without 
change,  but  continually  add  improvements  whenever  possible." 

"We  shipped  more  than  16.000  complete  Northrop  looms 
during  the  last  year.  What  better  testimonial  of  value  could  be 
presented?  With  our  new  plant  and  enlarged  facilities  we  shall 
easily  beat  that  record  in  1901. 

This  simply  means  that  those  running  common  looms  must 
expect  a  continuously  harsher  competition." 

"Having  adopted  a  business  founded  on  improvements  in 
cotton  machinery,  the  habit  of  striving  after  perfection  leads  us, 
at  times,  to  give  the  public  more  than  they  have  required.  Al- 
though the  Northrop  loom  has  sold  faster  than  we  could  supply 
the  trade,  we  have  recently  made  main  expensive  changes,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  our  customers,  if  ignorant  of  their  existence, 
would  probably  have  never  realized  the  need  of  them.  All 
loom  improvements  tend  toward  increased  cost  of  construction. 
We  have  taken  the  common  loom  and  not  only  applied  import- 
ant attachments,  but  have  also  raised  its  mechanical  grade." 

"Every  loom  that  we  sell  furnishes  an  additional  argument 
for  replacement  of  common  looms,  as  each  Northrop  Loom  in- 
creases the  competition  that  its  rivals  must  endure. 

Those  having  common  looms  must  admit  that,  sooner  or 
later,  the  Northrop  loom,  or  some  similar  type,  will  replace 
them.  Then  why  delay?  Every  year  of  postponement  could 
have  helped  to  pay  the  cost.  Those  who  are  waiting  for  the 
similar  type  to  be  developed  can  hardly  find  a  large  degree  of 
encouragement  from  the  present  situation.  They  used  to  wait, 
in  the  same  way.  for  spindles   of   possible   competing  capacity  in 


35 

earlier  years.  They  waited  five,  ten,  twent.3  years, — and  then 
finally  Eel!  Into  line,  after  losing  a  large  share  of  their  compara- 
tive value.  Some  of  them  lost  time  and  money  in  experiments 
with  inferior  styles,  and  history  will  undoubtedly  repeal  itself. 
Some  insist  on  patronizing  cheap  doctors,  cheap  lawyers,  and 
cheap  eggs.  Perhaps  they  are  satisfied  with  the  results.  Our 
loom  is  not  cheap  in  price,  hut  is  certainly  cheap  at    the   price." 

••Idle  success  ot  the  Northrop  Loom  has  forced  a  series  ot 
wide  spreading  events. 

It  has  delivered  the  trade  in  looms,  for  plain  Fabrics,  of  the 
United  States,  over  to  a  company  which  had  never  sold  one 
loom  prior  to  [895.  It  has  stimulated  the  building  of  new  mills 
and  the  increase  of  the  American  textile  industry  to  an  extent 
never  before  known.  It  has  forced  us  to  more  than  double  our 
plant,  and  more  than  treble  our  number  of  operatives. 

Idle  profits  have  been  shared  with  the  manufacturer,  who 
has  cheapened  production;  and  by  the  laborer,  who  has  received 
better  wages. 

While  common  loom  mills  are  shut  down,  Northrop  loom 
mills  continue  running." 

"We  shipped  more  than  2^.000  complete  Northrop  looms 
during  the  eighteen  months  of  January,  1900,  to  July,  1901. 
What  better  testimonial  of  value  could  he  presented?  Southern 
mills  are  taking  their  share,  hut  there  are  still  thousands  of  old 
looms  that  ought  to  he  replaced." 

"We  shipped  nearly  6,000  looms  in  the  first  three  months 
of   the  \ear  1901 . 

Facts  like  these  carry  conviction  to  those  ot  average 
comprehension.  We  shipped  over  9.000  Northrop  looms  from 
our  works  in  the  six  months  ending  July  1.  1901.  Further  com- 
ment is  unnecssary." 

"We  enter  on  the  seventh  \car  of  our  loom  business  with 


36 


an  enormous  order  list,  a  doubled  plant,  and  a  reputation  estab- 
lished by  the  experience  of  our  customers. 

Every  claim  ha-  been  justified,  every  assertion  proved. 

The  Northrop  Loom  does  halve  the  labor  cost  of  weaving, 
make  better  goods,  and  does  earn  dividends  for  it-  pur- 
chasers. 

Having  absolutely  removed  the  common  loom  from  compe- 
tition, so  far  a-  new  -ale-  are  concerned,  we  may  next  have  to 
spare  some  -light  consideration  for  the  mushroom  element  of 
automatic  substitutes  designed  to  -hare  the  fruit-  of  our  victory. 
Let  none  of  us  yet  unduly  excited,  however,  until  their  trial  has 
proved  them  worthy  of  attention." 

"We  -tailed  to  apply  attachments  to  loom-  in  order  to  make 
them  more  automatic.  We  soon  found  it  necessary  to  first 
improve  the  loom  itself.  We  believe  that  we  are  turning  out  a 
weaving  machine  fit  to  class  with  other  developed  mill  machin- 
ery, and  not  a  cheap  ma--  of  ill  fitting  part-,  half  wood,  half 
metal,  nursed  into  efficiency  with  bits  of  leather  and  string. 

Our  castings  are  machine  moulded  to  ensure  uniformity. 
They  are  drilled  in  jigs  and  assembled  to  gauges.  We  use  iron 
and  steel  wherever  possible.  We  know  we  put  more  expense 
into  this  loom  than  any  other  builder  of  similar  machine-.  We 
are  not  content  with  having  already  done  a  larger  loom  business 
per  year  than  any  competitor.  We  see  no  reason  why  we  should 
not  -ell  all  the  loom-  needed  for  plain  weaving." 

"Our  total  -ale-  to  date,  including  old  loom-  changed  over, 
amount  to  over  74.000. 

We  have  built  up  a  modern  plant  of  large  capacity  in  order 
to  meet  the  demands  of  our  customers,  and  now  have  22  acres 
of  floor  -pace  in  connected  buildings,  the  greater  part  of  which 
represents  recent  construction. 

\\  e  are  now  ready  for  increased  business  and  await  it  with 
a    confidence  based   on   the   evolution   of  the   pa-t.     It    may  be 


37 


noticed  that  we  refer  more  often  to  the  amount  ot  our  sales  than 
to  the  details  of  our  products.  The  latter  course  would  siinpb 
illustrate  <>!/>■  opinion,  while  sale^  illustrate  the  opinion  of  our 
customers — and  that  counts." 

"We  know  no  halt-truths  in  mechanics. 

A  machine  is  either  efficient  or  incapable — superior  or  infe- 
rior. 

The  Northrop  Loom  has  now-  been  running  in  large  quanti- 
ties for  more  than  six  years.  Its  success  is  proved  by  the  fre- 
quency of  orders  from  those  having  the  knowledge  that  comes 
with  use.  Some  of  the  earlier  customers  have  lately  wished  to 
actually  duplicate  those  first  machines  part  for  part. 

But  we  build  a  better  loom  now. 

We  have  an  experience  gained  by  continued  construction 
and  experiment.  We  have  vastly  increased  our  range  and  our 
variety  of  models.  We  cannot  only  show  a  purchaser  important 
novelties,  but  can  refer  to  successful  operation  in  any  of  the 
ordinary  lines  of  application." 


1902. 

"The  largest  single  order  we  have  yet  taken  has  just  been 
placed  with  us  for  Northrop  Looms  by  the  Grosvenor  Dale  Co., 
of  North  Grosvenor  Dale  (and  Grosvenor  Dale),  Conn. 

These  looms  were  chosen  after  lengthy  and  continued  trial 
of  former  lots.  These  were  used  in  a  wide  variety  of  cloth, 
including  various  standard  weaves  for  which  the  Grosvenor 
Dale  Company  has  long  been  famous.  Those  who  have  been 
cautiously  awaiting  the  outcome  of  others'  experiments  may 
now  perceive  the  verification  of  our  earlier  contentions." 

••The  Spindle  and  the  Loom. 

Our  first  ten  years  of   spindle  sales,  about  2. 000. 000. 


38 


Our  thirty  years  of  spindle  sales,  about  20.000.000. 

Every  prominent  mill  in  the  country  uses  them  in  their 
Spinning  Frames  or  Twisters. 

And  vet  in  the  first  ten  years  the  introduction  was  compara- 
tively slow. 

Our  first  seven  years  of  loom  sale-  figure  over  7^.000  (in- 
cluding looms  changed  over),  and  there  are  only  about  37:5.000 
looms  in  this  country  to  which  our  improvements  are  at  present 
adaptable. 

Every  mill  that  waited  to  change  spindles  made  a  mi-take. 
They  admit  it  by  their  present  policy. 

A  less  proportion  are  making  the  mistake  of  indecision  in 
the  loom  line,  but  the  conservative  are  still  ruining  their  chance 
in  the  same  old  way. 

Every  year  of  delay  means  just  so  much  lost  profit.  The 
above  figures  of  fact  prove  more  than  pages  of  argument. 
Think  them  over." 

"On  June  1st  our  unfilled  orders  for  complete  Northrop 
Looms  figured  exactlv  15.701 — and  the  boom  has  hardly  started." 

"Our  unfilled  orders  for  complete  Northrop  Looms  figured 
exactly  21,586  July  1st.  1902.      The  boom  is  beginning  to  boom." 

"Delegations  of  foreign  business  men.  operatives  and  labor 
leaders  have  been  visiting  this  country  to  investigate  the  claimed 
advantages  of  our  Northrop  Loom. 

We  started  selling  them  eight  years  ago  and  have  averaged 
sales  of  over  10.000  per  year. 

Outsiders  are  becoming  alarmed  and  yet  there  are  American 
mills  still  blindly  Inning  common  looms. 

Not  that  we  have  any  reason  to  complain.  It  takes  a 
doubled  plant  to  keep  pace  with  our  orders — but  it  ought  to  take 
a  trebled  plant." 

"In  spite  of  loom  shipments  during  August  of   1799  looms, 


39 


our  unfilled  orders  still  amounted  to  over  20.000  September  1st. 
1902." 

"Out  of  64,540  looms  now  running  or  ordered  by  the  single 
state  of  South  Carolina,  27,980  are  Northrop  Looms." 

"20,000  looms  to  build.  20,000  Northrop  Looms.  Equiv- 
alent in  cost  to  60,000  common  looms.  10  months'  work  at  2,000 
looms  per  month  and  new  orders  coming  in  all  the  time.  Works 
must  be  increased  again.  300,000  looms  yet  to  be  replaced  in 
the  United  States  alone,  and  new  mills  being  organized.  Such 
is  the  situation  confronting  the  Draper  Company  of  Hopedale, 
Mass." 


1903. 

"We  shipped  15,746  complete  Northrop  Looms  in  1902. 
and  applied  besides,  1.028  rilling  changers  and  1,234  warp-stop 
devices  to  looms  in  mills. 

We  commenced  the  new  year  by  shipping  2.^00  complete 
looms  the  first  month. 

Let  the  good  work  go  on." 

••Our  present  output  of  Northrop  looms,  over  2.000  per 
month.  The  majority  of  new  orders  are  placed  1>\  Southern 
Cotton  Mills." 

••\\  e  have  today  sold  over  80.000  complete  Northrop  looms. 
We  have  applied  attachments,  in  addition,  to  over  1^.000  looms. 
We  figure  that  there  are  still  350,000  looms  that  must  he 
replaced.  They  will  vanish  as  surely  as  the  common  spindle 
and  the  old  style  card.  We  are  enlarging  our  plant  t<>  prepare 
tor  their  elimination.  In  a  certain  well  known  mill  six  weavers 
and    four    boys    to    till    hoppers  run  216  Northrop  looms.      In  an- 


4o 


other  mill  no  weaver  runs  less  than  24  Northrop  looms.     Facts 
like  these  breed  conclusions." 

"We  have  a  new  Northrop  Loom  that  should  be  of  interest 
to  weavers  of  print  cloth  and  similar  goods.  It  has  the  latest 
large  pattern  hopper,  our  steel-harness  warp  stop-motion  with 
simplified  knock-off,  a  double  fork  to  prevent  thick  and  thin 
places,  the  simplest  take-up  ever  devised,  our  improved 
Draper-Roper  let-off.  and  a  new  device  called  the  Anti-bang, 
which  prevents  jar  and  breakage  when  a  shuttle  is  trapped. 
We  call  it  the  J  model.     Large  orders  already  being  filled." 


4' 


THE   PRESENT   STANDING    OF    OUR 
LOOM— APRIL,  1904. 

A  record  of  over  100.000  looms  actually  introduced  within 
a  period  of  nine  years,  sold  at  prices  equivalent  to  three  times 
the  cost  of  the  common  looms  with  which  they  compete,  is  cer- 
tainly sufficient  evidence  that  the  Northrop  loom  has  come  to 
stay.  The  amount  thus  paid  us  for  Northrop  looms  would  actu- 
ally replace  three-quarters  of  the  common  cotton  looms  now 
running  in  the  whole  United  States.  As  our  last  year's  sales 
were  larger  than  those  of  any  previous  year,  it  is  evident  that 
the  introduction  is  not  based  on  any  quick  enthusiasm,  or  false 
data. 

We  started  with  the  assumption  that  the  Northrop  loom 
would  enable  the  weaver  to  produce  a  doubled  product;  in  fact, 
before  even  making  this  modest  assertion,  we  proved  its  truth  to 
our  own  satisfaction  by  running  a  weave  room  of  eighty  looms 
in  our  own  works,  for  many  months,  open  to  the  inspection  of 
hundreds  of  practical  mill  men.  The  first  looms  that  we  put 
out  were  therefore  seasoned,  as  it  were,  by  experience:  in  tact, 
the  first  models  ran  so  well  that  we  have  been  asked  in  recent 
years  to  duplicate  them. 

It  is  no  slight  task  to  introduce  an  improved  machine  which 
aims  at  replacing  the  entire  equipment  of  the  most  important 
section  of  one  of  the  greatest  industries  in  the  world.  It  cannot 
be  done  in  one  year,  or  one  decade.  Nothing  within  our  mem- 
ory has  so  completely  misted  competition  as  the  high  speed  spin- 
dle; and  vet  comparison  of  sales  will  prove  that  our  loom  has 
met  with  readier  appreciation  in  the  earlier  years.  There  are 
still  several  hundred  thousand  common  looms  which  should  be 
replaced,  and  which  will  be  replaced.      The  delay    is   not   due   to 


4- 


hesitation  based  on  disbelief,  but  rather  a  hesitation  based  on 
financial  conditions.  With  new  mills,  where  capital  is  raised  by 
subscription,  equipment  with  Northrop  looms  is  becoming  a  mat- 
ter of  course:  hut  an  old  mill  faces  a  serious  proposition  when 
considering  the  replacement  of  an  entire  division  of  its  plant, 
where  the  surplus  is  not  sufficient  to  meet  the  cost,  and  where 
stockholders  are  not  inclined  to  pay  assessments,  or  take  new 
stock.  The  mills  that  have  a  comparatively  new  equipment  of 
common  looms  are  naturally  indisposed  to  reduce  their  valuation 
by  considering  them  practically  worthless  for  active  use.  We  are. 
however,  selling  tons  of  looms  for  junk,  that  are  equal,  if  not 
better,  than  similar  looms  still  bought  by  a  few  obstinate  adherents 
to  ohsolete  methods.  There  is  also  a  class  of  overshrewd  managers 
who  wait  in  hope  that  competition  may  reduce  our  prices,  or  that 
patents  will  expire  in  time  to  force  a  reduction  to  meet 
their  demands.  Nine  years  of  constant  introduction  rinds  the 
anxious  ones  still  waiting  the  possible  competitor;  and  the  con- 
stant improvement,  with  continual  issue  of  important  patents, 
assures  us  that  our  hold  on  this  line  will  continue  beyond  the 
time  to  which  their  hopes  might  limit  us.  Meanwhile  these 
waiting  purchasers  are  losing  the  possible  profits  of  use.  The 
fact  that  they  may  lie  making  favorable  showings  by  reason  of 
••luck"  in  purchase  of  cotton,  especial  advantage  in  situation, 
labor,  or  power,  cannot  disguise  the  fact  that  with  the  Northrop 
loom  their  profits  would  be  still  higher. 

"\\  hen  we  refer  to  the  Northrop  loom  improvements,  we  are 
speaking  primarily,  of  the  filling-changer,  the  warp  stop-motion, 
and  their  co-operating  parts.  Before  our  application  of 
these  devices,  there  had  never  been  a  successful  use  of 
filling-changing  devices  of  any  nature,  and  warp  stop- 
motions  were  only  used  in  a  very  limited  held,  a  few  in- 
stances being  known  of  their  application  to  special  classes  of 
double  warp-weaving.     There  is  hardly  any  vital  change  in  any 


43 


line  of  mechanics,  which  so  suddenly  brought  successful  auto- 
matic mechanism  into  extensive  use,  without  the  preliminary 
record  of  long  use  of  partially  successful  devices  of  similar  nature. 
This  fact  is  particularly  curious,  in  view  of  the  fact  that  a  warp 
stop-motion  was  one  of  the  inventions  disclosed  in  the  original 
power  loom  specification  of  Cartwright,  as  shown  in  his  patent 
of  1784.  Main-  inventors  had  struggled  for  years  with  the  prob- 
lem of  automatic  change  of  shuttles.  The  inventor  of  the  Nor- 
throp filling-changing  devices,  however,  borrowed  practically 
nothing  from  the  former  art  in  this  line,  and  when  it  was  found 
necessary  to  incorporate  a  warp  stop-motion  with  the  filling- 
changer,  there  was  nothing  formerly  developed  that  could  he 
adopted,  and  inventors  practically  started  in  this  Held  also  with- 
out the  aid  of   prior  thought; 

Neither  the  filling-changer  nor  the  warp  stop-motion  neces- 
sarily increases  production  in  the  loom  itself.  The  filling-changer 
does  save  time  formerly  occupied  in  changing  shuttles  by 
hand,  with  the  loom  stopped,  hut  the  warp-stop-motion  actually 
decreases  production  by  stopping  the  loom  oftener  than  it  would 
he  stopped  in  the  common  practice  of  plain  weaving.  The  com- 
bination of  the  two  devices,  however,  allows  the  operative  to 
multiply  efficiency  :  for  tin-  filling-changer  replaces  labor,  and  the 
warp  stop-motion  relieves  the  annoyance  of  constant  oversight. 
To  appreciate  the  great  saving  introduced  by  the  filling-changer, 
it  may  he  well  to  note  the  operations  gone  through  by  a  weaver 
on  a  plain  loom,  when  the  filling  is  exhausted.  They  follow  in 
the  sequence  now  recorded,  the  weaver  performing  the  following 
functions  : 

1.  Releases  the  shipper  brake. 

2.  Pushes  the  lay    hack. 

3.  Withdraws  the  shuttle. 

4.  Puts  the  reserve  shuttle  in  the  shuttle  box  on  the  la\  . 
^.     Pulls  the  shipper  handle  to  starl  the  loom. 


44 


6.  Rubs  the  cloth  below  the  breast  beam  to  prevent  a  thin 
place,  if  light  goods  are  being  woven. 

7.  Picks  up  the  discarded  shuttle  again. 

S.      Pulls  the  shuttle  spindle  out  on  an  angle. 
9.      Removes  the  empty  bobbin  or  cop  tube. 

10.  Puts  in  a  new  bobbin  or  cop. 

11.  Pulls  off  a  sufficient  length  of  filling. 

12.  Snaps  the  shuttle  spindle  back  into  place. 

13.  Holds  the  filling  over  the  shuttle  eve  entrance. 

14.  Sucks  the  filling  through  the  eve. 

15.  Places  the  shuttle  in  its  holder,  where  it  remains  until 
needed. 

Now,  this  series  of  performances  must  be  gone  through  with 
every  time  the  filling  is  exhausted.  On  one  loom,  the  filling  may 
run  from  one  minute  to  twenty  minutes,  according  to  the  size  of 
the  yarn  and  the  amount  of  yarn  in  the  shuttle.  The  average 
time  is  perhaps  six  minutes,  especially  if  we  count  the  number  of 
times  that  the  weaver  must  come  to  the  loom  to  start  it  up  when 
the  filling  breaks.  With  a  loom  having  an  average  of  six  min- 
utes between  such  stops,  the  weaver  must  come  to  the  loom  once 
every  ten  minutes.  If  running  eight  looms,  he  would  have  such 
a  duty  nearly  once  a  minute.  With  the  Northrop  loom,  on  the 
contrary,  the  weaver  can  fill  a  hopper  containing  2^  bobbins. 
which,  with  the  same  average  of  running  time,  would  last  two 
hours  and  a  half,  without  requiring  attendance.  But  a  co-opera- 
ting feature  of  great  advantage  with  the  Northrop  loom  is  the  fact 
that  the  weaver  can  fill  the  hoppers  when  convenient,  rather 
than  be  forced    to    come    to  the  looms  with  irritating  regularity. 

Referring  to  the  associate  attachment,  the  Warp  Stop-Mo- 
tion, it  is.  of  course,  well  known  that  the  warp  threads  will  break 
in  weaving.  On  a  common  loom,  the  broken  thread  will  not  be 
raised  by  its  heddle,  and  thereby  leaves  an  open  space  in  the 
cloth,  more  or  less  visible  to  the  eye,  according  to  the  character 


45 


of  the  goods  woven.  Very  often  the  broken  end  gets  tangled 
around  adjacent  threads  between  the  harness  and  the  reed,  hold- 
ing several  of  them  cither  above  or  below  the  tip  of  the  shuttle, 

which  therefore  causes  a  defect  known  technically  as  a  "float"  or 
"overshot."  If  the  weaver  does  not  notice'  the  tank  promptly, 
the  extra  strain  will  break  main  of  the  warp  threads,  and  in  any 
event,  a  pickout  is  necessary.  In  some  mills,  a  weaver  is  forced 
to  stop  all  looms  under  his  charge  while  attending  to  a  pickout. 
It  is  not  necessary  to  explain  the  trouble  caused  by  these  defects 
to  any  weaving  expert.  The  temples  must  he  pulled  back,  all 
the  filling  threads  that  have  been  laid  since  the  tangle  commenced 
removed  by  a  tedious  combing  operation,  the  warp  beam  must  be 
turned  back,  the  tension  of  the  cloth  properly  adjusted,  and  the 
loom  again  set  in  motion. 

When  we  first  applied  filling-changing  devices,  we  found 
that  the  weaver,  although  greatly  relieved  of  manual  labor,  was 
even  more  uneasy,  on  account  of  possible  overshots,  having  more 
looms  to  look  after.  We  saw  that  it  was  absolutely  necessary  to 
furnish  a  protection  in  the  way  of  an  accurate  warp  stop-motion, 
so  that  there  should  be  no  mental  anxiety  whatever,  and  no  neces- 
sity tor  alert  observation.  It  took  our  inventors  several  years  to 
produce  a  practical  mechanism  of  this  nature:  in  fact,  the  intro- 
duction of  the  Filling  Changer  itself  was  delayed  for  quite  a 
period  while  waiting  for  the  associate  mechanism.  With  the 
protection  oi  the  Warp  Stop-Motion,  a  weaver  is  only  limited  in 
the  number  of  looms  attended,  by  the  amount  of  warp  bleaks 
which  must  be  repaired,  and  the  number  of  bobbins  which  can  be 
put  into  the  hoppers  within  the  time  to  be  given.  Under  present 
s\  sterns^ Northrop  loom  weavers  are  usually  relieved  of  oiling  and 
cleaning  their  looms,  so  that  apart  from  the  warp  and  filling 
duties,  they  have  practically  nothing  to  attend  to.  save  the  re- 
moval of  the  cloth. 


46 


PERSPECTIVE    VIEW    OF    EARGE    HOPPER,    ORIGI- 
NAL   DESIGN. 


Taking  the  various  attachments  in  order  for  detailed  consid- 
eration, we  shall  consider  the  Hopper  first,  as  the  more  import- 
ant element  of  the  whole  combination.  The  cut  shows  the 
"Large  Hopper,"  or  "24-Bobbin  Hopper."  It  is  operated 
in  rotation  by  the  reverse  motion  of  the  transferrer.  Our 
latest     forms     have     a     new     and     improved     bobbin     support. 


47 


r 


provided  with  a  leather  washer  cushion    to    prevent   breakage, 

and  we  are  also  using  a  new  form  of  bobbin  tip  holder, 
which  will  take  either  bobbins  or  cops,  as  desired.  We  start- 
ed with  a  hopper  that  held  a  supply  of  14  extra  bobbins, 
but  the  change  to  the  24-bobbin  hopper  has  proved  a  distinct  ad- 
vantage, removing  the  Northrop  loom  still  further  from  competi- 
tion with  the  possible  perfected  Shuttle-Changing  loom,  which 
would  probably  be  limited  to  a  reserve  supply  of  six  or  eighl 
shuttles.  We  proved  by  an  absolute  test  on  our  old  hopper,  that 
a  reduction  in  the  number  of  bobbins  held  in  reserve,  placed  an 
absolute  restriction  on  the  weaver's  capacity;  and  the  converse  of 
the  proposition  is  a  natural  sequence. 

A  vital  principle  of  the  Northrop  invention  is  contained  in 
the  Shuttle,  which  is  adapted  not  only  to  hold  a  bobbin  or  cop 
skewer,  but  to  hold  it  so  that  it  may  be  automatically  removed 
by  the  entrance  of  a  new  bobbin  or  cop  skewer.  The  spring 
jaws  of  the  Northrop  shuttle  co-operate  with  the  ring-  or  ribs, 
on  the  bobbin  or  cop   skewer.  SO   as   to   hold   either  one  normally 


4s 


Our  h  i-  s  t 
Large  Hopper. 
Holds  twentv- 
four  extra  bob- 
bins. Is  rotated 
by  reverse  action 
of  transferrer. 


-tzr&nn^ 


Present  pattern 

Large  Hopper. 
New  end  hold- 
ers adapted  for 
either  bobbins  or 
cop  skewers.  Also 
new  bobbin  sup- 
port, and  thread 
discs  with  wider 
surfaces  for  thread 
to  hear  against. 


49 


in  proper  horizontal  position,  and  yet  liberate  them  quickly 
when  opened  by  the  entrance  of  the  new  filling-holder,  pressed 
into  the  shuttle  from  the  hopper  when  the  transferrer  is  in 
motion.  The  Transferrer  is  a  simple  pivoted  lexer  with  a 
hammer  head,  normally  in  position  over  the  lowest  bobbin 
in  the  hopper.  A  pivoted  dog  attached  to  a  crank  arm  on  the 
transferrer  is  normally  out  of  reach  of  a  moving  part  on  the  lay 
called  a  "Bunter."  When  the  supply  of  filling  in  the  running 
shuttle  is  either  broken,  or  exhausted,  the  ordinary  weft  fork  de- 
tects the  fault  and  by  simple  co-operation  with  a  moving  shaft 
raises  the  dog  aforesaid  to  meet  the  impact  of  the  hunter,  therein 
transfering  the  forward  movement  of  the  lay  through  the  trans- 
ferrer pivot,  to  press  the  transferrer  head  down  onto  the  reserve 
bobbin  in  the  hopper,  and  push  it  into  the  shuttle.  The  bobbin 
formerly  in  the  shuttle  falls  through  the  exit  opening  of  the  shut- 
tle, down  onto  a  guiding  chute  into  a  large  box,  or  receptacle, 
attached  to  the  loom  side. 

Reference  to  the  cuts,  which  show  various  views  of  the  shut- 
tles, bobbins  and  cop  skewers,  will  make  the  operation  clear. 

It  is  not  only  necessary  that  the  new  bobbin  should  he  placed 
properly  in  the  shuttle,  hut  it  is  vitally  necessary  that  the  thread 
on  the  new  bobbin  should  enter  the  shuttle  eye,  SO  that  it  ma\  he 
properly  drawn  off  in  weaving.  The  threads  of  the  bobbins  in 
tlie  hopper  are  wound  round  a  stud  in  the  center  of  the  rotating 
hopper  itself:  and  when  a  bobbin  is  transferred  to  the  shuttle  and 
the  shuttle  i>>  thrown  by  the  picker-stick,  the  thread  still  held  by 
the  hopper  disc  automatically  enters  the  slotted  eye  of  the  shuttle  : 
the  final  position,  however,  not  being  attained  until  the  shuttle 
has  been  thrown  hack  from  the  opposite  side  of  the  loom. 

It  is  quite  evident  that  when  the  shuttle  receives  the  bobbin 
it  must  he  under  the  hopper  in  approximately  correct  position. 
Variation  is  allowed  by  reason  of  the  several  notches  in  the  shut- 
tle spring,   and   also  by   reason    of    an    incline,   which   guides    the 


5° 


bobbin  down  into  the  spring,  even  if  the-  shuttle  be  quite  ;t  dis- 
tance out  of  place.  To  protect  against  any  abnormal  position, 
which  would  cause  the  incoming  bobbin  to  strike  a  solid  part  of 
the  shuttle  and  cause  breakage,  we  provide  a  device  known  as  the 

"Shuttle  Position  Detector."  which  reaches  a  finger  across  the 
front  of  the  shuttle  whenever  the  dog  on  the  transferrer  is  raised. 
If  the   shuttle  is  in  the  path  of  this  finger,   the  dog  will    not   be 

raised  sufficiently  to  encounter  the 
hunter,  and  therefore  no  transfer  will 
take  place.  If  this  be  twice  repeated, 
the  loom  stops  automatically  by  a  de- 
vice called  the  misthread  stop-motion, 
attached  to  the  fork  slide,  so  that  the 
weaver  knows  that  the  shuttle  is  not 
being  properly  picket!.  The  same 
mechanism  will  also  stop  the  loom,  pro- 
viding the  hopper  is  exhausted,  or  pro- 
viding the  shuttle  fails  twice  to  thread, 
or  "misthreads,"  as  we  term  the  opera- 
ation.  It  will  be  remembered  that  the 
thread  on  the  incoming  bobbin  is  at- 
tached to  a  stud  on  the  hopper.  It 
therefore  extends  from  the  stud  to  the 
cloth,  and.  if  not  attended  to,  would 
break  in  time  from  the  strain,  as  the 
cloth  moves  towards  the  take-up  roll. 
Early  form  of  Thread-  and  the  snapped  end  might  fly  into  the 
Cutting  Temple.  cloth.     We  therefore  provide  a  Thread- 

Cutting  device,  attached  to  the  regular 
temple,  which  operates  from  the  motion  of  the  lay  to  sever  any 
such  threads  close  to  the  selvage.  As  it  operates  every  time  the 
lay  beats  forward,  it  has  many  chances  to  cut  the  thread. 


SI 


Later  form  of  Thread-Cutting  Temple. 


Made  with  solid  heel  SO  that  a  loose  heel  will  not  bring 
extra  strain  on  the  cutter  and  cause  the  temple  to  be  reciprocated 
through  the  cutter. 

It  may  be  noticed  that  Filling-Changing  mechanism  includes 
five  distinct  and  separate  devices,  namely;  the  Filling-Changer 
itself,  the  Shuttle,  the  Shuttle  Position  Detector,  the  Misthread 
-Stop-Motion  and  the  Thread-Cutting  Temple.  There  are. 
therefore,  several  distinct  lines,  all  covered  by  patents,  many  of 
which  extend  much  longer  than  the  original  patents  on  the  origi- 
nal mechanism. 


53 


As  shown,  the  transferrer  is  placing  the  bobbin  in  the 
shuttle,  the  dog  being  in  engagement  with  the  hunter  on  the  lay. 
The  empty  bobbin  is  falling  down  the  chute  into  the  box.     The 

chute  as  first  designed  was  a   movable  part,  independent  of  the 
lay  itself. 

This  cut  was  made  from  our  first  model  loom  and  happens 
to  show  the  hopper  on  the  left  side,  we  making  hoppers  in  rights 
and  lefts  at  that  time. 


54 


CROSS-SECTION    OF    A    NO.    1    COP-HOPPER    WITH 
TRANSFER  TAKING  PLACE. 

The  entering  cop  skewer  has  just  started  the  pressure  that 
expels  the  one  in  the  shuttle.  It  has  still  to  move  some  distance 
down  the  chute  to  reach  the  box.  The  expelled  skewer  is  not 
empty  in  this  instance,  as  it  illustrates  a  case  in  which  the 
rilling  thread  broke  while  weaving-. 


3.1 


DETAIL  OF  CONNECTION 

Between  the  filling  fork  which  detects  the  absence  of  filling 
and  a  No.  i  cop  hopper  or  magazine. 


56 


ILLUSTRATION  OF  HOPPER  ACTION  ON  B  MODEL 

LOOM. 


57 


A  is  the  filling-fork  which  detects  absence  of  filling,  and 

through  the  usual  catch  and  vibrator  gives  action  to  rod  B  con- 
trolling latch  C. 

When  latch  is  raised  it  will  be  in  contact  with  a  hunter  on 
the  lay,  thus  forcibly  depressing  the  transferrer  D  which  pushes 
a  bobbin  from  the  hopper  into  the  shuttle  beneath  it.  at  the  same 
time  expelling  the  one  carried  by  the  shuttle,  which  is  then 
guided  into  the  large  tin  box  held  on  the  loom  side. 

E  is  a  portion  of  the  device  which  determines  the  position 
of  the  shuttle  in  the  box.  If  not  properly  in  place  the  latch  C 
will  not  engage  the  hunter,  as  the  device  of  which  E  is  a  part 
will  be  prevented  from  further  movement  by  contact  with  the 
shuttle  tip.  and  as  E  and  C  work  in  unison,  the  movement  of  C 
is  also  checked.  This  special  shuttle  position  detector  did  not  go 
into  extensive  use  on  our  own  looms  but  was  adopted  as  standard 
bv  our  Canadian  licensees. 


58 


- 


A  FEW  OF  THE 
SHUTTLES  USED 
WITH  OUR  NOR- 
THROP LOOMS. 


Shuttle  at  the  left 
is  k  n  o  w  n  as  t  h  e 
"Keeley,"  although  in- 
corporating  the  spring 
of  J.  II.  Northrop  and 
the  incline  cover  of  (i. 
().  Draper. 


Shuttle     at     right    is 
known        as       No.       7 

in  our  shop  records. 
It  has  what  we  know 
as  the   "Stimpson"  e\  e. 

This  Hrst  model  had 
no  friction  pocket  and 
the      eye      casting     was 

held  hv  a  nut  on  the 
In  itt<  )in. 


€  i 


59 


1E1 


V 


n 


No.       16       Shuttle. 
Stimpson   improved  e\  e 

with  pocket  for  Manuel 
friction,  the  casting  be- 
ing held  in  the  shuttle 
body  by  a  transverse  bolt 
and  nut.  Various  mod- 
ifications have  other 
numbers,  but  this  is 
the  regular  standard  de- 
sign which  has  gone 
into  most  extensive  use. 


No.     i  6 


Shutth 


Stimpson  special  eye 
and  new  spring  and  cov- 
er. A  very  satisfactory 
model.  Note  the  new 
spring  and  cover  which 
leave  the  wood  of  the 
shuttle  body  less  cut  out 
and  therefore  stronger. 
We  have  little  trouble 
with  loose  springs  in 
this  design. 


6o 


Xo.  263  Shuttle,  or  Jonas  Northrop  Eye 
stvle.  Very  successful  on  cops  and  coarse  til- 
ling; in  fact,  the  best  threading  eve  which  we 
have  for  all  classes  of  work. 

This  shuttle  saves  rilling  breakage  ami 
makes  misthreading  immaterial. 

We  recommend  it  unreservedly  until  a 
better  design  is  possible. 


6i 


NORTHROP  LOOM   BOBBINS   AND    COP   SKEWERS. 

No.  i .     Represents  our  early  type  of  bobbin — now  discarded. 

No.  2.     First  abandonment  of  groove  at  base. 

No.  3.     Standard  pattern  with  Claus  step  for  ordinary  yarn. 

No.  4.     Special  Queen   City  pattern. 

No.  5.  Standard  for  coarse  rilling.  Note  also  the  base 
on  this  and  No.  6,  made  larger  than  formerly.  We  tit  all  our 
new  looms  to  take  this  bobbin,  as  it  has  greater  strength  and  is 
less  affected  by  reaming.  Of  course,  all  the  other  patterns  can 
have  this  same  base.  In  ordering  filling  spindles  for  these  bob- 
bins be  careful  and  specify  the  large  cup. 

No.  6.  Special  metal  base  cover  extending  under  bobbin 
rings  to  prevent  their  loosening.  A  most  important  improve- 
ment. 


62 


& — ' 


No.  7.  Feeler  bobbin  for  use  with  feeler  or  mispick  pre- 
venter loom.  This  style  has  three  rings  on  base.  Note  cham- 
fer on  rings  at  ends.  We  have  all  our  rings  made  in  this  way 
now.  as  they  are  less  liable  to  catch  yarn  in  the  spinning-room. 

Xo.     S.     Long  traverse  bobbin,  special  notches  on  barrel. 

No.     9.     Long  traverse  bobbin  with  ordinary  ribs. 

No.  10.     Cop  skewer. 


63 


Our  bobbins  and  cop  skewers  are  made  in  three  lengths, 
i.     6  3-4  inches  long  for  traverse  of  s  1--  inches. 

2.  7  3-8       "  "      ••  "  »  6  i-S     " 

3.  S  "         "     "         "         »  6  3-4     " 

The  exteriors  shown  in  the  cuts  are  used  on  all  three  lengths. 

We  have  many  additional  contours  to  suit  the  whims  of 
customers,  but  those  shown  are  approved  by  use. 

All  bobbins  and  cop  skewers  must  be  ordered  from  us. 
They  are  patented  articles. 

\\  e  insist  on  this  simply  to  protect  the  successful  operation 
of  our  looms.  We  do  not  take  profit  enough  to  pay  us  for  the 
trouble  in  handling  this  part  of  the  business. 


'•A  few  nights  ago  the  night  watchman  of  the  mill  told  of  seeing- 
strange  sights  and  hearing  queer  noises  during  the  small  hours  of  the 
morning.  He  is  a  sober  man  of  middle  age  and  in  perfect  health,  so  it 
was  hard  to  find  reason  for  not  believing  his  story. 

He  says  that  shortly  after  midnight  he  heard  a  noise  in  a  remote 
corner  of  the  mill  like  the  running  of  weaving  looms.  He  went  there 
and  found  six  looms  running  at  full  speed  without  any  apparent  motive 
power  ami  cloth  was  being' woven  without  any  guidance." — [/row  dis- 
patch to  the  New  York  World,  Nov.  17.  1000. 


"The  Northrop-Draper  loom  has  had  many  tests  and  made 
many  records.  We  will  now  chronicle  one  that,  in  romance,  sur- 
passes the  loom  of  this  make  at  Tucapau  mills.  Wellford,  S.  C, 
winch  ran  nearly  i\  hours  without  stopping  a  second  : 

— Young  couple  engaged— against  wishes  father— hurried  con- 
sultation—wedding party  gathered  in  the  dynamo-room— returned— 
the  bride  finding  all  her  Northrop  loom-  running  along  a-  merri- 
ly as  ever."'— [Textile  Excelsior. 


64 


STEEL    HARNESS    KNOCK- 
OFF. 

This  cut  illustrates  a  harness 
warp  stop-motion  as  used  on  some 
of  our  looms.  The  vibrators  are 
rocked  from  a  cam  movement  on 
the  lower  shaft  ami  the  trip  acts 
directly  on  the  shipper. 


65 


WARP  STOP-MOTIONS. 

At  the  start  of  our  loom  introduction,  we  limited  ourselves 
to  the  weaving  of  two-harness  goods,  utilizing  simple  warp  stop- 
motion  devices,  which  were  perfectly  efficient  in  this  field. 
When  we  began  to  supply  looms  to  weave  with  3,  4  and  5  har- 
nesses, together  with  the  Held  covered  by  dobbies,  it  became 
necessary  to  develop  new  designs,  so  that  we  now  have  four  dis- 
tinct styles  of  warp  stop-motion,  and  mollifications  in  each  class. 
Whenever  possible,  we  recommend  the  use  of  our  steel  harness 
stop-motion.  This  has  only  been  adapted  to  more  than  two  har- 
ness work  in  recent  years.  With  this  arrangement,  the  heddles 
themselves  serve  as  warp-stop  detectors,  heing  thin,  flat  steel 
ribbons,  sufficiently  stiff  to  act  in  arresting  the  motion  of  a 
vibrator.  The  heddles  are  strung  on  bars,  through  slots  much 
wider  than  the  bars  themselves;  thus  when  a  thread  breaks 
the  heddle  may  drop  a  distance  equivalent  to  the  extra  length  of 
the  slot,  and  thus  come  within  the  path  of  a  moving  vibrator 
which,  when  arrested,  effects  the  stopping  of  the  loom  by  inter- 
mediate mechanisms. 

The  advantages  of  the  Steel  Harness  Warp  Stop-Motion 
over  all  other  kinds  are  numerous.  In  the  first  place,  the  heddles 
themselves  are  practically  indestructible.  They  show  no  signs  of 
wear  after  years  of  use:  in  fact,  they  are  probably  better  for  use, 
through  the  polishing  given  by  the  passing  threads.  The  cotton 
harness,  with  which  they  compete,  wears  out,  needs  revarnishing 
and  probably  averages  an  expense  for  repair  and  replacement  of 
perhaps  a  dollar  a  loom  per  year.  We  see  no  reason  win  the 
steel  harness  should  not  wear  at  least  twenty  years,  saving  some 
nineteen  dollars  in  actual  outlay,  if  our  premises  are  correct. 
Another  important  advantage,  especiallj  noticeable  with  coarse 
yarn,  is  the  saving  of  expense   in   drawing-in.     Cotton  harness 


66 


warp  stop-motions,  with  additional  warp-stop  detectors,  cost  more 
to  draw  in,  because  the  drawing-in  hand  lias  to  draw  threads 
through  the  detectors  as  well  as  through  the  reed  and  harness. 
Our  steel  harness  is  even  easier  to  draw  in  than  the  cotton  har- 
ness, for  the  heddles  may  slide  on  the  bars  at  will,  accommodat- 
ing themselves  to  the  convenience  of  the  operative.  Another  ad- 
vantage of  the  steel  heddle  warp-stop  is  that  it  will  stop  more 
promptly,  preventing  warp  runs  after  warp  breakage  :  and  itd 
not  stop  so  often  for  slack  threads.  A  further  advantage,  of  great 
importance  in  mills  where  they  change  the  product  frequently,  is 
that  the  steel  harness  heddles  space  themselves  automatically  .  - 
that  the  same  harness  may  be  used  for  various  weaves.  The 
free  lateral  movement  also  allows  the  weaver  readier  access 
when  repairing  broken  warp  threads. 

We  have  been  asked  more  than  once  why  it  is  that  the  shut- 
tles in  a  Northrop  loom  fail  to  throw  out  of  the  loom  like  the 
common  shuttle:  in  fact,  our  shuttles  stay  in  the  shade  so  uni- 
formly as  to  question  the  need  for  shuttle  guards.  The  reason 
i--  easily  seen  on  investigation.  Shuttles  are  thrown  out  of  looms 
for  several  possible  causes,  hut  the  most  frequent  one  is  the 
formation  of  floats,  or  the  preliminary  to  a  pickout.  All  of  our 
looms  will  stop  before  a  float  can  make  serious  trouble,  and  our 
steel  harness  warp-stop  type  will  stop  the  loom  before  the  warp 
threads  can  tangle  sufficiently  to  swerve  the  shuttle  from  its 
proper  course. 

In  the  line  of  steel  heddle  warp-stops  we  are  absolutely  with- 
out competition.  No  other  loom  builder  has  ever  attempted  to 
introduce  this  class  of  devices,  to  our  knowledge. 

In  the  earlier  use  of  the  steel  harness,  it  was  claimed  that 
the  steel  heddles  broke  more  warp  threads  than  the  twine  har- 
ness. This  max  have  been  true  at  that  time:  vet  the  advantag  - 
were  more  than  enough  to  compensate.  After  learning"  proper 
methods  of  sizing,    proper   shape   of    cams   and    proper  arrange- 


67 


r 


^ 


3 


n 


x« 


ment  of  heddles  in  their 
frames,  we  have  now  broughl 
the  steel  heddle  warp-stop 
where    it    is    practically    equal 

to  the  cotton  harness  in  the 
number  of  warp  faults.  On 
regular  print  weaving,  we 
find  the  stops  for  both  breaks 
ami  slack  threads  combined,  is 
between  10  and  i^  per  day, 
per  loom,  with  either  steel 
heddles  or  cotton  harness. 

At  present,  we  do  not  sup- 
ply steel  harness  mechanisms 
for  a  greater  number  than  five 
harnesses. 

The  original  cotton  har- 
ness warp  stop-motion  which 
we  introduced,  used  a  drop 
wire  device  applied  between 
the  heddles  and  the  lease  rods, 
each  detector  serving  for  two 
or  more  threads.  This  could 
he  used  on  looms  having  more 
than  two  harnesses,  in  a  large 
number  of  applications.  This 
motion  was  \  er\  successful 
and  has  been  used  on  thou- 
sands of  looms.  W  e  are  re- 
cently applying  a  stop-motion 
situated  between  the  lease  rods  and  the  harness,  hut  which  uses 
one  detector  for  each  thread,  which  looks  \er\  promising  for 
cotton  harness  work  with  anv  number  of  harnesses. 


No.    2 


m 

No.    I       Steel    heddle. 

No.  2  Cotton  harness  drop 
wire  for  "Roper" 
warp  stop. 

No.  3  Detector  for  single- 
thread  stop-motion. 


6S 


A  fourth  type  is  known  as  our  Single-Thread  Warp  Stop- 
Motion,  and  has  been  very  largely  used  in  recent  years.  In  this 
class,  one  detector  acts  for  each  thread,  and  a  peculiarity  is 
noticed  in  that  the  detectors  are  arranged  in  two  banks,  and 
placed  in  the  position  of  the  usual  lease  rods,  where  they  ac- 
complish the  functions  of  leasing-  devices,  a-  well  as  warp  stop- 
motions,  doing  away  with  the  necessity  for  leasing  rods,  and 
simplifying  the  loom  to  that  extent.  Where  drop  wires  are 
applied  hack  of  the  usual  lease  rods,  a  broken  warp  thread  does 
not  always  promptly  allow  the  drop  to  operate,  as  the  lease  rods 
sometimes  make  sufficient  friction  on  the  thread  to  hold  the 
drop  in  position. 

While  we  are  subject  to  more  or  less  competition  in  applying 
warp  stop-motions  to  old  looms,  our  competitors  are  either  lim- 
ited to  use  of  electrical  devices,  with  their  inherent  evils,  or  to 
the  use  of  warp  stop-motions  in  which  the  detectors  are  subject 
to  a  more  or  less  severe  twisting  strain.  Our  patents  cover  the 
use  of  serrated  vibrators  which  can  engage  the  detector-  without 
twisting  and  bending.  Sometimes  the  vibrators  and  co-operat- 
ing devices  on  competing  devices  are  made  light  and  delicate. 
in  order  not  to  bend  the  drops,  and  therefore  are  less  positive  in 
action,  and  more  liable  to  damage.  So  far  as  the  application  of 
warp  stop-motions  to  other  than  Northrop  looms  i-  concerned, 
we  were  interested  primarily  in  applying  warp  stop-motions  to 
looms  that  could  not  use  the  filling-changer,  such  as  drop  box 
looms.  We  have  taken  little  interest  in  attempting  to  introduce 
warp  stop-motions  on  common  looms  for  plain  weaving,  because 
we  consider  such  application  a  mere  makeshift,  in  view  of  the 
greater  advantages  of  the  combined  filling-changing  and  warp- 
stop,  which  the  mills  should  avail  themselves  of.  rather  than 
attempt  to  try  and  cheapen  their  weaving  by  adding  expensive 
devices  to  old  machinery.  Warp  stop-motions  of  themselves, 
do   not    lessen    the   weaver's    labor,   except    in    the   prevention   of 


69 


Moats  and  overshots.  Every  thread  that  breaks  must  be  pieced 
up,  as  formerly,  and  it  is  even  possible  thai  the  additional 
weigfht  of  the  detectors  causes  more  breakage. 


DEVICES     FOR     MAKING     PERFECT 

CLOTH. 

The  third  new  attachment  introduced  with  the  advent  of  the 
Northrop  Filling-Changer  and  the  Warp  Stop-Motion,  is  a  mech- 
anism only  used  on  certain  classes  of  goods,  which  co-operates 
with  the  filling-changer  to  prevent  mispicks,  and  thus  make  per- 
fect cloth.  Mispicks  are  Auc  to  the  running  out,  or  breakage  <>\ 
filling,  and  the  insertion  of  new  filling  without  removing  the  par- 


ticular  thread  of  weft  remaining  in  the  shed,  and  also  without  in- 
serting the  new  filling  in  the  proper  shed.  In  the  general  line  of 
goods  woven,  mispicks  have  not  been  considered  as  important 
defects,  hut  with  other  goods,  such  as  napped  fabrics  and  certain 
classes  of  multiple  harness  weaving,  mispicks  are  not  allowable. 
In  common  loom  weaving,  they  may  be  obviated  by  extra  pains 
and  extra  labor  on  the  part  of  the  operative,  who  can  pick  out 
the  particular  thread  by  hand,  and  turn  the  loom  oxer  to  Mud  the 
true  shed  before  inserting  the  full  shuttle.  With  automatic 
looms,  the  prevention  of  mispicks  is  attained  by  changing  the  fil- 
ling before  final  exhaustion,  so  that  a  full  thread  is  left  in  every 
shed.  If  the  filling  should  break,  the  loom  may  he  stopped  au- 
tomatically, so  that  the  weaver  can  find  the  pick  :  or.  if  such 
breakage  is  not  frequent,  the  loom  may  he  arranged  to  run  the 
chance  of  a  mispick  at  such  periods. 

The  mechanism  employed  for  this  purpose  consists  of  a 
simple  device  called  the  "Feeler."  because  it  feels  of  the  weft  in 
the  shuttle  through  an  opening  in  the  shuttle  side,  and  ahsolutely 
measures  its  volume.  When  reduced  to  a  certain  definite  quan- 
tity, the  feeler  operates  to  liberate  mechanism  governing  the  ac- 
tion of  the  filling-changing  devices. 

The  cut  first  printed  shows  our  latest  feeler,  which  is  applied 
at  the  shipper  end  of  the  loom.  As  shown,  it  is  in  contact  with 
the  yarn  in  the  shuttle,  passing  through  a  hole  in  the  front  box 
plate  and  a  slot  in  the  side  of  the  shuttle  itself.  Like  the 
Aumann  feeler,  on  the  opposite  page,  it  is  independent  of 
back  lash  in  lay  and  position  of  front  plate.  The  operating 
parts  are  shown  in  full  relief,  and  are  few  in  number.  The 
cuts  of  the  Aumann  feeler  show  the  pattern  in  use  just  previous. 
The  mechanism  at  this  side  end  of  the  loom,  however,  does  not 
accomplish  all  that  is  necessary,  for  the  operation  of  the 
filling-changer  by  a  feeler  introduces  a  curious  problem,  the 
ejected   bobbin    having   its    thread   extended   through    the   shuttle 


7' 


AIM  ANN  FEELER  JUST  BEFORE  OPERATION. 

This  cut  shows  the  form  of  feeler  mechanism  devised  by 
Mr.  Louis  A.  Aumann,  agent  of  the  Dwight  Mfg.  Co.  at  Chic- 
opee  and  modified  by  inventions  of  W.  F.  and  C.  II.  Draper. 


AUMANN  FEELER  OPERATING. 

We  have  had  these  applied  to  thousands  of  looms.  They  are 
independent  of  the  wear  or  alteration  in  the  throw  of  the  lay 
and  therefore  require  practically  no  adjustment  after  the  first 
setting. 


72 


eye  to  the  cloth,  while  the  bobbin  itself  is  in  the  receptacle, 
thus  leaving  an  additional  thread  to  he  taken  care  of  by  cutting 
apparatus.  Unfortunately,  this  thread  does  not  lie  in  the  path 
of  the  regular  thread-cutter,  requiring  an  extra  cutting  device 
to  operate  at  the  proper  time.  Such  a  device  is  attached  to  the 
shuttle  position  detector,  which  reaches  forward  to  determine 
the  position  of  the  shuttle  in  the  box,  as  the  position  detector 
passes  into  the  path  of  the  thread  referred  to.  This  additional 
cutter  not  only  severs  the  thread  at  this  point,  hut  also  holds 
the  severed  portion  taut  until  the  regular  thread-cutter  severs  it 
again  near  the  selvage  of  the  cloth.  While  somewhat  difficult 
to  describe,  the  operation  is  perfectly  simple  and  efficient. 

The  Feeler  is  practically  necessary  on  certain  classes  of 
goods,  yet  objection  has  been  raised  on  account  of  the  waste  yarn 
left  on  the  bobbins.  We  have  endeavored  to  reduce  this  to 
small  limits  by  continual  perfection  of  the  feeler  mechanism 
itself.  We  also  limit  the  amount  of  waste  by  applying  attach- 
ments to  the  spinning  frames  which  spin  the  filling  yarn,  called 
"•Bunch  Builders,"  which  govern  the  traverse  motion  so  as  to 
wind  a  slight  preliminary  hunch  on  the  bobbins  near  the  lower 
end  of  the  traverse,  so  that  the  feeler  will  not  operate  until  the 
bunch  itself  begins  to  he  reduced  in  volume.  We  have  patterns 
of  these  mechanisms  to  tit  all  the  American  makes  of  spinning 
frame.  Another  objection  to  the  feeler  has  been  raised  on 
account  of  the  extra  labor  necessary  in  removing  the  waste 
yarn  from  the  bobbins,  especially  as  the  bobbins  have  some- 
times been  damaged  by  the  use  of  knives  for  this  purpose. 
We  are  now  building  little  machines,  in  which  a  large,  rough- 
surfaced  roller,  by  rapid  revolution,  will  easily  wind  off  the 
waste  yarn  of  several  bobbins  at  a  time,  reducing  the  expense 
as  compared  with  the  former  process,  and  causing  no  damage  at 
all  to  the  bobbins.  Most  of  the  waste  yarn  is  easily  pulled  off 
by  tin'  fingers. 


73 


QQ 


C/3 


3  2 

H    < 


TO  TEMPLE 

THREAD  CUTTER 


74 


THE  DOUBLE  FORK. 

The  cloth  which  we  intend  to  weave  on  our  looms  may  be 
roughly  divided  into  three  classes.  First,  including  goods  <>n 
which  mispicks  are  not  important  and  on  which  slight  thick  and 
thin  places  are  of  little  moment.  These  are  produced  by  the 
ordinary  plain  loom  of  commerce  which  our  regular  Northrop 
loom  is  replacing. 

The  second  class  includes  the  grades  on  which  mispicks  are 
considered  important,  and  for  which  Ave  apply  the  feeler  device. 

The  third  class  includes  all  the  goods  on  which  mispicks  are 
not  important,  but  on  which  thick  and  thin  places  are  not 
desired.  This  grade  can  be  woven  on  our  new  double-fork 
loom--  and  we  expect  to  find  all  grades  improved  by  use  of  this 
new  idea. 

There  is  a  prevailing  notion  to  the  effect  that  print  cloth 
may  have  all  sorts  of  faults,  because  the  dyes  disguise  them. 
Anyone  who  looks  at  the  cloth  running  over  the  blackboard  in 
the  cloth  room  of  any  print  mill,  will  notice  defects  in  every 
single  cut  of  cloth  woven,  there  being  full  as  many  with  cloth 
woven  on  the  common  loom  as  with  the  cloth  woven  on  the 
Northrop  loom.  The  buyers  have  grown  accustomed  to  these 
faults.  When  it  is  understood,  however,  that  cuts  of  print  cloth, 
or  any  other  cloth,  can  be  woven  entire,  without  a  thick  or  a 
thin  place,  the  trade  will  undoubtedly  demand  improvement. 

The  Double  Fork  system,  has  already  worked  with 
great  success  on  thousands  of  looms,  and  has  recently  been 
improved  and  simplified  in  detail.  It  detects  the  absence  of  fill- 
ing on  either  side  of  the  loom,  and  prevents  the  take-up  from 
moving  if  tilling  is  not  present.  With  two  forks,  absence  of 
tilling  is  detected  more  promptly,  anil  they  also  take  care  of  any 
trouble   caused   by   a    dragging    end   of    filling,  which    sometimes 


75 

holds  the  fork  up  al  the  left  side  of  the  loom,  if  the  yarn  is 
coarse.  The  double  fork  is  therefore  applicable  to  coarse 
weaving,  as  well  as  very  fine  goods,  having  special  advantages 
in  each  application.  It  is  also  added  to  Feeler  looms  as  an 
additional  precaution. 

The  Filling-Fork,  whether  single  or  double,  is  the  most 
important  element  of  the  loom,  to  our  mind.  It  is  liable  to  false 
operation  if  the  tines  get  bent,  or  if  the  lay  gets  out  of  position, 
or  loose  in  its  bearings.  We  are  now  making  a  fork  in  which 
the  tines  are  cast  in  place  in  a  solid  block,  and  are  also  bringing 
out  improvements  in  loom  construction  intended  to  prevent  the 
possibility  of  variation  in  the  position  of  the  lay  itself. 


STANDARD  MODELS  OF  LOOM  CON- 
STRUCTION. 

Having  considered  the  different  new  attachments  which  are 
peculiarly  adapted  to  automatic  weaving,  we  next  show  cuts  of 
looms  complete  with  the  devices  in  their  relative  co-operation 
with  the  standard  loom  organisms  w  here  their  detail  may  he  still 
further  elaborated.  Although  many  loom  manufacturers  have 
built  from  one  standard  set  of  patterns  for  years  at  a  time,  we 
have  brought  out  ten  different  models,  with  full  sets  of  patterns 
for  each,  within  a  period  of  ten  years.  These  different  models 
are  not  only  necessary  by  reason  of  variety  in  width  and  weight 
ot  cloth  woven,  hut  also  represent  improvements  in  design  of 
sufficient  importance  to  warrant  new  construction  throughout. 


A     MODEL     (ALSO    CALLED     1 804    PATTERN  )  . 

\  it  now  built.  This  was  the  loom  sent  out  on  the  Queen 
City.  Tucapau,  and  other  early  orders.  We  built  this  model  in 
rights  and  lefts,  not  having  then  adopted  our  one-hand  loom 
construction. 


77 


S        M     \ii        ;  ll«  ■  ifefJiJJF  -j«    '/ill 


*    ^ -'■     >**      PM1 


S^ki.mn 


li^^W^kwi -J 

§  >m  ^Wm  (A  ^      h  II         i B  hi 


v 


END  VIEW  OF  A   MODEL    LOOM. 

Steel  Harness,  Saw-tooth  Gearing,  Shepard  Let-off,  Mason 
Take-up,  Movable  Bobbin-chute  and  other  details  as  originally 
presented. 


"The  cloth  is  as  near  perfect  as  can  be.  Weavers  run,  or  attend, 
from  16  to  28  Northrop  Looms,  and  do  Dot  work  any  harder  than  I  hare 
Been  them  do  on  eight  common  Looms,  and  pretty  near  all  the  weavers 
here  are  what  would  be  called  new  weavers;  thai  i-.  having  only  from 
two  to  three  years1  experience;  and.  in  fact,  the  majority  "t  them 
learned  here." — [Contributor  to  Wade's  Fibn  and  Fabric. 


7S 


B    MODEL    (ALSO    CALLED    1S9S    LOOM). 

Not  now  built.  This  pattern  was  continually  improved  and 
was  our  standard  for  prints  and  other  light  goods  until  1S9S.  It 
had  a  wider  frame  than  the  A  model.  longer  shuttle  boxes,  new 
take-up.  Stearns  rocker  and  One  Hand  construction. 


C    MODEL    (ALSO    CALLED    1896    loom). 

Not  now  built.  This  was  our  first  heavy  pattern  loom.  It 
was  of  the  One  Hand  construction  with  heavy  design  throughout. 
(No  cut  of  this  to  show.) 


79 


D  MODEL,   HEAVY  STANDARD,  NO.  1   HOPPER. 

Cut  shows  (l<>l>by  head  applied.      The  take-up  on  this  special 
style  of  D  loom  is  of  the  worm  gear  variety. 


"Constant  progress  lias  been  the  watchword  of  the  last  quarter  <>f  a 
century,  and  will  lead  in  the  next.su  near  at  hand.  Mr.  Draper  puts 
the  Northrop  loom,  tin-  latest  production  <>t  liis  model  shop,  into  your 
mill  today  and  starts  it  with  amazing  success,  but  while  this  pattern, 
the   product   of  many   years   of  hard  work  of  the   inventor,   with   the 

added  talents  of  many  mechanics,  has  I n  in  course  of  construction,  a 

new  and  better  way  has  been  devised  to  accomplish  desired  results  or  to 
overcome  Some  Slight  delect  obvious  in  your  lot  of  looms.     And  you  are 

told  that  in  the  next  lot  of  l< s  built  these  defects  will  be  remedied, 

and  too  late  you  regret  that  you  had  not  waited  before  giving  your 
order. 

The  difficulty,  however,  is  inevitable.  Evolution  is  constant  in 
everything  to  which  the  mind  devotes  itseli  earnestly,  honestly,  and 
persistently — and  each  lot  of  looms  turned  out  will  naturally  be  superi- 
or in  some  respect  to  that  which  preceded  it." — \_Pre8t.  Frederick  E. 
Clarke  at  Montreal  meeting  of  the  X.  E.  Cot.  Man.  Asso.,  Oct.  •">.  1899. 


So 


CROSS  SECTION  OF  D  MODEL  LOOM. 
No.  i  hopper,  five  harness,  cotton-harness,  Roper  warp-stop. 


"The  Xorthrop  looms  at  this  mill  are  running  on  60s  warp  and  70s 
to  80s  filling.  I  have  never  seen  looms  run  any  better,  on  coarse  num- 
bers even,  than  these  are  running;  in  fact  I  do  not  see  how  any  looms 
could  do  better.  The  weavers  run  16  looms  each  and  did  not  seem  to 
have  anything  to  do.  The  overseer  called  my  attention  to  his  loom  fix- 
ers on  these  looms  sitting  down  by  their  bench  sleeping,  which  he  said 
was  no  unusual  Bight.  He  says  he  gets  all  <>f  95  per  cent,  product."— 
[Extract  from  Expert's  Report,  June  20,  1903. 


Si 


D  MODEL  LOOM  WITH   DOBBY. 

We   have   sold   hundreds  of  loom--  for  dobby  weaves  which 
arc  giving  the  best  of  satisfaction. 


82 


rpk" 


FORTY   INCH  E  MODEL  LOOM. 
N<>.   1    Hopper,   Steel  Harness,  original  High-roll  Cut  Motion. 


••In  conversation  with  one  of  our  most  prominent  manufacturers 
this  week,  who  has  just  returned  from  a  trip  through  the  South,  lie 
informed  us  rliat  lie  took  especial  pains  to  visit  a  mill  making  print 
cloths,  where  it  had  all  Northrop  Looms,  and  that  he  never  saw  nicer 
woven  goods,  and  made  at  a  cost  which  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  state, 
but  it  was  very  1<>w  indeed.*' — [Boston  Journal  of  Commerce. 


u 


i    a 


84 


E  MODEL. 

Regular  pattern  for  prints  and  sheetings  tip  to  1904.  Cut 
shows  a  steel  harness  bobbin  filling  loom  as  made  in  1898  and 
1899.  Improvements  have  been  added  continuously7,  as  will  be 
shown  in  other  cuts  to  follow. 


"I  called  at  the Mills:  tumid  the  looms  running  very  well. 

They  have  reduced  the  seconds  <>n  their  plain  work  to  1  \4>  per  cent,  and 
on  their  sateens  to  one-half  of  one  per  cent.  This  is  perfectly  satisfac- 
tory to  them." — [Salesman's  Report,  Oct.  24,  1903. 


S5 


E  MODEL  LOOM  WITH  FEELER. 

NO.     I     HOPPER. 

The  deep  can  is  used  to  enable  the  dropping  bobbin  to  drag 
out  the  length  of  filling  cut  by  the  extra  thread  cutter. 

While  the  cut  shows  the  feeler  on  a  two-harness  loom,  it  is 
more  customary  to  use  this  device  on  multiple  harness  weaving. 

The  feeler  shown  is  one  of  the  earlier  constructions. 


"We  lnoknl  at  the  Draper  loom-.  Which  are  running  extremely 
well,  with  weavers  running  16  loom-  each  on  L-shade  cotton  flannel,  17s 
warp  and  9s  filling.  They  are  doing  very  well  with  the  feelers  and 
were  making  little  waste." — [Salesman'^  Report  of  Not  28,  1903. 


S6 


CROSS-SECTION    OF    E    MODEL    STEEL    HARNESS 

LOOM,  NO.  1   HOPPER. 

(Shuttle  positioning  device  is  different  from  that  in  perspec- 
tive view  of  E  model,  and  hopper  is  for  cops  instead  of  bobbin. 

Pulley-  are  at  the  left  hand  on  this  loom.) 

This  cut  gives  a  good  detail  of  the  cloth  winding  device  on 
our  high  roll  take-up.  Also  shows  hand  adjustment  of  harness 
jacks. 

The  detail  of  the  warp-stopping  connection  cannot  he  shown 
in  this  cut.  as  the  devices  used  are  not  on  the  half  of  the  loom 
which  appear-  in  the  cut. 


S7 


E  MODEL  WITH  LARGE  HOPPER. 

This   is   the   regular  standard  type  for  general  weaving  used 
from  1898  to  K104  (still  in  use).     It  began  to  receive  the  large 

hopper  as  per  cut  in  1 901.      More  looms  have    been    sold   ol   this 
model  than  any  other  that  we  have  put  out. 


••In  New  England  to-day  the  price  <>f  weaving  on  the  ordinary 
looms,  wiili  the  lasl  ten  per  cent,  thai  has  just  been  given,  is  nineteen 
and  eight-tenths  cents— say  twenty  cents— per  cut,  that  is,  Cor  fifty 
yards.  A.  new  loom  has  heen  invented  by  which  the  weaver  can  mind 
ahoal  twice  as  many,  and  therefore  the  price  \»t  cut  is  reduced  about 

one-half.    These  are  what  are  called  1 1 1 « -  Draper  looms In 

the  South  they  have  hardly  any  other  kind  <>t  looms;   they  have  the 

best.     I  saw  one  woman  minding  twenty-four  looms The 

price  they  pay  for  fifty  yards  in  smith  Carolina  is  -ix  and  one-quarter 
rents.  The  operatives  "t  course,  even  at  this  rate  are  earning  more 
than  they  ever  earned  before."    ....  Georg<   Ounton, 


ss 


F  MODEL. 
Extra  heavy  pattern  for  goods  72  inches  and  wider.      Made 
with  compensating  let-off   for   two   beams,   triple   cranks,  com- 
pound spring-  cloth  winder,  friction  pulley  drive. 

G  MODEL. 
Special  frame.     D  Model  weight  with  E  Model  depth.     We 
have  no  cuts  to  show  these  two  latter  styles. 


II  MODEL.  HEAVY   SIDE    CAM    LOOM.  8  HARNESS. 
Frame  same  a-  D  and  E  Models. 


I  MODEL,  not  ready  for  illustration.  This  will  he  of  a 
construction  somewhat  similar  to  our  present  E  Model  and 
adapted  for  the  same  class  of  weaving. 


89 


J  MODEL  LOOM   FOR    PRINT   CLOTH    AND    LIGHT 

WEAVES. 

There  are  more  looms  weaving  plain  two  harness  goods  on 
print  cloth  style  than  on  any  other  single  grade  of  cloth.  Mills 
can  equip  for  this  standard  product  and  run  continuously  for 
years  without  necessity  for  changes.  We  started  originally  with 
a  loom  for  weaving  these  goods,  but  in  designing  foresaw  other 
uses  and  therefore  prepared  the  frame  and  other  parts  for  them 
as  well.  A  year  or  so  ago  we  made  up  our  minds  that  there 
was  a  sufficient  held  in  light  narrow  weaving  to  warrant  the 
building  of  a  special  loom  primarily  adapted  lor  this  use.  We 
have  thus  developed  a  model  thai  take-  up  no  more  floor  space 
than  is  necessary,  that  is  no  heavier  than  is  necessary,  and  in 
which  the  moving  parts  are  not  clums)  and  power  absorbing. 
The  fatigue  of  running  and  handling  such  a  loom  must  be  greatly 


9° 


reduced.  We  utilize  new  inventions  to  reduce  shock,  jar, 
smashes,  etc.,  and  in  view  of  the  light  goods  to  be  woven,  pro- 
tect against  the  slightest  crack  or  thin  place  by  novel  mechanisms. 
Several  of  these  will  he  particularly  referred  to  in  the  special 
articles  on  take-up.  double  fork,  anti-hang.  etc.  These  various 
motions  have  shown  so  much  advantage  that  we  do  not  intend  to 
limit  their  adoption  to  the  J  Model  loom  alone.  There  are 
several  thousand  of  these  looms  already  running  and  several 
thousand  more  on  order.  They  have  proved  a  great  success, 
especially  when  fitted  with  the  complete  range  of  devices  which 
we  recommend  for  them.  They  will  run  at  high  speed  if  neces- 
sary, and  with  lighter  power.  They  can  he  made  with  either 
front  or  back  hinders  and  with  either  steel  or  cotton  harness, 
though  we  recommend  the  steel  harness  unreservedly  for  this 
class  of  work. 


OUR   COMMON  LOOM. 

We  have  at  times  filled  several  orders  for  common  looms 
for  parties  who  were  not  fully  decided  as  to  whether  our  mech- 
anisms were  applicable  to  their  special  kind  of  goods,  with  the 
idea  that  when  we  should  have  the  necessary  devices  they  could 
be  attached  to  the  looms.  At  the  present  time,  however,  our 
range  of  weaving  is  so  broad  that  we  rarely  find  a  case  where 
the  common  loom  could  be  advised,  and  we  foresee  little  future 
chance  for  their  introduction. 

Owing  to  our  expensive  experimenting  and  disregard  for 
cost,  we  probably  make  the  best  common  loom  now  in  the 
market.  Our  common  loom  is  simply  our  Northrop  loom  with 
the  hopper  and  warp  stop-motion  left  off  and  a  slight  change  at 
the  fork.      With   our  make   of   loom    it   is,  of  course,  guaranteed 


91 


OUR  COMMON    LOOM. 

The  cut  shows  the  common  loom  of  the  1>  model  type,  ol 
which  we  have  sold  several  lots  to  purchasers  who  bought  to 
equip  with  Northrop  devices  later.  We  have  not  encouraged 
the  sale  of  plain  looms  as  our  force  has  been  luisv  with  North- 
rop Loom  orders.  It  seems  strange,  however,  that  tho-e  who 
continue  to  buy  common  looms  do  not  universally  demand  a  t\  pe 
that  will  he  guaranteed  to  receive  future  improvements  readily. 


92 


that  our  devices  can  be  easily  applied,  while  this  is  not  always 
true  of  looms  made  by  other  builders. 

We  have  given  fully  as  much  attention  in  late  years  to  per- 
fecting the  conventional  loom  parts  as  we  have  to  the  betterment 
of  our  own  additional  devices.  The  common  loom  which  we 
should  furnish  would,  therefore,  have  all  of  our  latest  improve- 
ments in  the  line  of  let-off,  take-up,  etc. 


It  is,  of  course,  understood  that  the  cuts  which  we  show  do 
not  pretend  to  illustrate  all  of  our  loom  products.  Each  model 
that  we  build  is  made  in  many  widths,  and  modifications 
are  often  necessary.  At  present,  our  range  in  width  is  from 
looms  for  2S-inch  goods,  which  will,  of  course,  weave  narrower, 
up  to  looms  for  cloth  10S  inches  wide.  We  call  any  loom  a  wide 
loom  which  requires  additional  parts,  such  as  centre  swords, 
double  beam.  etc.  We  have  found  it  advisable  on  these  wide 
looms  to  use  front  binders,  and  a  simple  rocker  motion  that  will 
give  the  shuttle  a  smooth,  straight  pick. 

Some  classes  of  looms  require  clutch  pulleys,  which  we  can 
supply  when  ordered,  but  we  do  not  recommend  them  for 
universal  application. 


While  we  prefer  to  sell  complete  looms,  we  can  apply  our 
devices  to  certain  models  of  old  looms  of  others'  manufacture. 
Such  changing  over  is  especially  advisable  where  the  common 
loom  is  too  valuable  t<>  be  discarded,  as  in  the  case  of  broad 
looms,  dobby  looms,  etc.  We  have  changed  oyer  several  thou- 
sand common  looms  with  good  results  and  have  a  special  depart- 
ment for  that  work. 


93 


LOOM   CONSTRUCTION. 

Soon  after  the  introduction  of  our  first  looms,  which  were 
made  in  rights  and  lefts,  we  found  that  the  shuttle  used  with  one 
type  of  loom  threaded  up  better  than  the  shuttle  on  the  other,  the 
eyes  being  entirely  different  in  threading  detail.  This  led  to  the 
idea  of  making  looms  all  one  hand,  and  as  this  change  only 
necessitated  invention  in  the  line  of  shipping  mechanism,  we 
promptly  adopted  the  idea,  and  have  built  all  our  looms  in  this 
way  ever  since.  It  is,  of  course,  a  great  convenience  to  us,  as 
builders,  to  have  all  of  our  looms  made  from  the  same  patterns, 
and  it  must  be  an  even  greater  advantage  to  the  mills,  for  not 
only  is  their  supply  of  repair  parts  lessened,  but  the  weavers 
find  it  much  easier  to  go  through  a  set  of  one  hand  movements, 
rather,  than  learn  to  do  many  operations  with  either  hand. 

It  seems  strange  that  the  original  error  of  complicating 
parts  and  detail  by  right  and  left  construction  was  prolonged 
for  a  full  century.  It  is,  of  course,  still  necessary  to  have 
the  pulleys  arranged  to  belt  at  either  side  of  the  loom,  and  we 
find  it  also  more  convenient  to  have  our  let-offs  changeable 
in  position;  but  the  shipper  handle  is  always  at  the  left,  and 
the  hopper  always  at  the  right,  on  all  looms  which  we  have 
built  with  the  exception  of  the  A  model.  When  we  change 
over  looms  of  other  makes,  we  supply  parts  for  both  right  and 
left  hand  looms,  as  no  other  builder  has  followed  our  lead, 
especially  as  the  system  we  use  is  protected  by  several  patents. 
It  is  well  known  that  with  the  ordinary  type  of  loom,  as  built, 
one  hand  will  run  better  than  the  other,  a-  patterns  of  one  hand 
are  not  precise  opposites  to  the  other,  and  are  necessarily  better 
or  worse  in  adaptation.  This  gives  two  differently  operating 
constructions  to  bother  the  fixer. 


94 


LET-OFF. 

Although  the  Bartlett  was  our  own  original  let-off,  and 
although  we  did  use  it  on  thousands  of  our  Northrop  looms  in 
an  improved  form,  we  have  now  replaced  it  by  a  greatly 
superior  mechanism  known  as  the  "Draper-Roper,"  which  is 
self-adjusting  and  thoroughly  efficient  for  nearly  all  the  possible 
requirements. 

We  made  a  curious  mechanical  error  on  these  motions  as 
first  sent  out.  which  tended  to  give  them  a  bad  name,  but  on 
discovery  of  the  fault  it  was  promptlv  remedied  by  sending 
correct  parts  to  every  mill  where  the  let-offs  were  in  use,  and  we 
now  hear  nothing  but  praise  for  their  performances. 

Like  the  Bartlett  Let-off,  the  Draper-Roper  is  actuated 
from  the  motion  of  the  lav  and  governed  by  the  tension  of  the 
yarn  at  the  whip-roll.  It  is,  however,  additionally  controlled  by 
the  variation  in  the  diameter  of  the  warp  beam,  as  the  warp  is 
woven  off,  by  a  follower,  pressing  against  the  beam,  which  by 
its  change  in  angle  determines  the  limits  of  motion  by  which  the 
actuating  parts  operate.  With  ordinary  let-offs,  the  cloth  woven 
varies  remarkably  in  width  from  full  to  empty  beam,  whereas 
with  the  Draper-Roper  this  variation  is  practically  eliminated,  so 
far  as  influence  of  the  let-off  itself  is  concerned.  There  are 
other  causes  which  affect  the  width,  and  their  results  should  not 
be  confused  with  the  let-off  action.  A  recent  test  of  actual  ten- 
sion at  the  whip  roll  during  the  entire  time  a  beam  was  weaving 
off  showed  that  the  variation  was  confined  between  33  1-2  and 
^2  pounds — certainly  a  remarkable  uniformity  for  this  class  of 
mechanism. 


"Their  Northrop  loom*  were  all  running  very  well:  the  weavers 
run  18  prints  each,  and  on  the  wider  looms  16  each:  the  fixers  run  115 
Looms  each." — [Extract from  Expert's  Report,  •  /»/,/.  2.  1904. 


95 


BARTLETT  LET-OFF. 

The  Bartletl  was  our  standard  until  the  Draper-Roper  let- 
off  appeared.  We  owned  the  original  Snell  and  Bartlett  patent 
and  sold  over  50.000  of  them  for  use  on  old  and  new  looms 
before  1870. 


96 


DRAPER-ROPER  LET-OFF  AND  ANTI-BANG. 

The  cut  shows  this  let-off  applied  to  a  J  model  loom. 
Note  the  follower  which  hears  against  the  warp  on  the  heam. 
The  operative  parts  are  largely  hidden  from  view. 

Note  in  the  cut  of  the  let-off  another  new  idea  which  we 
call  the  anti-bang.  The  fro-'  slide  connects  to  the  whip  roll  so 
as  to  release  the  warp  in  case  the  loom  bangs  off.  This  relieves 
the  loom  itself  from  shock  and  also  prevents  smashes.  We 
believe  this  idea  will  greatly  lessen  loom  repairs  and  the 
loosening  of  nuts  and   screws. 


97 


SHEDDING    MECHANISM. 

Our  standard  forms  <>f  shedding  mechanism  at  present 
include  the  ordinary  single  roll  with  strapping  at  top  and  cam 
treadle  drive  at  bottom,  for  two  harness  work,  with  either  steel 
or  cotton  harness,  the  Lacev  Top  Rig  for  multiple  cotton  har- 
m's-, and  a  spring  compensating  motion  for  the  top  rigging  of 
our  multiple  steel  harness  mechanism.  We  are.  however,  ex- 
perimenting with  new  motions  for  our  steel  harness  looms,  and 
shall  soon  introduce  a  complete  novelty  in  the  line  of  shedding 
mechanism,  doing  away  with  all  treadles,  cams,  and  jacks  under 
the  warp,  giving  more  space  for  the  warp  beam  and  bringing 
all  of  the  operating  parts  out  where  they  are  easily  observed  and 
adjusted.  We  shall  have  more  to  say  publicly  about  this  device 
when  our  patents  are  issued  and  a  further  trial  made. 

The  Lacey  device  is  simple  and  durable  for  cotton  harness 
u-e.  and  it  is  always  in  place  to  hang  a  warp,  doc-  not  wear  out 
-trap-  so  fa-t  as  the  ordinary  motion,  and  is  easily  adjusted.  It 
is  quite  similar  to  the  Wvman  motion  used  on  Crompton  & 
Knowles  looms,  but  we  think  it  contains  important  additional 
improvements;  in  fact,  other  loom  builders  have  wished  at  times 
to  have  the  privilege  of  using  our  motion  on  their  own  makes  of 
loom. 

We  are  ready  to  equip  looms  with  side  cams  for  special 
weaves,  or  dobbies.  when  desired.  We  have  built  hundreds  of 
side  cam  looms  for  corduroy  and  thousands  of  dobby  looms  for 
various  weaves. 


••one  man  who  came  cinder  tuy  personal  observation  was  working 
27  looms.  Be  was  producing  a  print  cloth,  28  inches  wide,  60x64  ends 
per  inch,  29's  warp  ami  37's  weft.  The  average  for  the  whole  mill  was 
about  i'.»  looms  per  weaver.  I-  it  possible  Cor  our  manufacturers  to 
compete  with  thi<  "r" — [English  expert's  report  <>n  visit  to  America,  from 
English  paper,  October,  1902. 


9s 


DETAIL  OF  LACEY   TOP-RIG  ON  D  MODEL. 

Our  steel  harness  is  becoming  so  universal  that  we  have 
less  Held  for  this  motion  than  formerly.  Cut  also  shows  our 
worm  -ear  take-up  with  the  let-back  modification. 


99 


TAKE-UP  AND   CUT-MOTION. 

Although  it  might  have  been  simpler  to  stick  to  standard 
designs  in  this  line,  copying  from  well  known  mechanisms,  we 
have,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  given  as  much  time  to  the  Take-Up  ol 
the  loom  as  any  other  separate  feature.  We  started  with  a 
conventional  pattern,  but  on  finding  that  many  of  our  customers 
desired  to  weave  large  rolls  of  cloth,  we  tried  to  design  an 
arrangement  which  would  wind  any  size  roll  desired  up  to  r8 
inches  in  diameter.  We  saw  that  the  High-Roll  arrangement  of 
cut-motion  seemed  to  offer  marked  advantages  in  this  line, 
although  the  High-Roll  had  never  gone  into  noticeable  use  in 
this  country  and  was  open  to  many  objections  in  the  forms  com- 
monly known  abroad.  Mr.  Northrop  devised  our  present  stand- 
ard construction  with  the  exception  of  quite  recent  changes, 
and  the  majority  of  our  looms  now  in  use  are  equipped  with  the 
High-Roll  pattern. 

In  its  best  known  form,  the  cloth  passes  directly  to  the 
rough-surfaced  roll  and  is  wound  around  a  core,  or  bar,  which 
is  pressed  up  against  the  roll  by  two  supports  operating  from  a 
coiled  spring  which  governs  a  double  gear  and  rack  device. 
The  spring  is  wound  up  by  the  action  of  the  racks  as  the  roll 
winds,  and  the  cloth  is  removed  by  releasing  the  spring  with  a 
hand  crank.  There  are  marked  advantages  in  this  arrangement, 
as  the  cloth  will  not  shrink  or  wrinkle  and  the  width  of  the 
goods  will  be  more  uniform  and  the  picks  more  even.  The 
breast  beam  comes  outside  the  cloth,  protecting  it  from  blemish 
when  the  weaver  leans  over  the  loom.  The  direct  acting  roll 
also  helps  take  strain  oil'  the  temples  and  lessens  warp 
breakage. 

On  all  our  cut-motions  we   use  a  metal  cloth  roll,  to  which 


the  filleting  is  applied,  unless  the  goods  woven  demand  some- 
special  surface  only  applicable  to  a  wooden  roll.  This  will  not 
shrink  or  swell  like  a  wooden  roll,  thereby  keeping  the  picks  per 
inch  uniform  and  the  yards  per  pound  at  a  proper  standard. 
We  believe  the  mill  that  runs  wooden  rollers  will  make  its  cloth 
either  too  light  or  too  heavy.  If  too  heavy,  the  mill  is  giving 
away  value  without  remuneration,  and  if  too  light,  there  will 
be  dissatisfaction  at  the  buying  end. 

Quite  recently  we  have  made  an  improvement  by  which  the 
core  or  bar  in  the  cloth  roll  is  positively  started  by  having 
geared  teeth  engage  with  gears  on  the  large  winding  roll  when 
first  starting  to  wind.  As  the  cloth  gets  larger  in  diameter  on 
the  roll  the  gear  teeth  move  apart  and  unlock. 

While  the  mechanisms  just  described  are  parts  of  the 
cut-motion,  they  are  operated  directly  by  the  take-up  devices 
proper  which  transmit  movement  from  the  lay  or  cam-shaft  or 
other  moving  parts  ol"  the  loom.  We  have  quite  a  variety  of 
mechanisms  for  various  classes  of  looms,  many  of  which  we 
have  not  shown  separately,  and  some  of  which  have  been  consid- 
erably modified  since  the  cuts  were  made.  It  is  practically  im- 
possible to  keep  our  cuts  up  to  date  in  view  of  the  rapidity  of 
improvement  in  the  devices  themselves. 


"There  has  been  expended  in  experiments,  in  investigation  and  for 
patent-,  some  1300,000.  The  result  is  a  reduction  of  one-half  in  the 
cost  of  weaving  cotton  cloth.  The  cost  of  weaving  constitutes  one-half 
the  cost  of  labor  required  to  produce  cotton  doth.  Consequently  the 
savins  secured  by  the  loom  is  approximately  one-quarter  of  the  labor  of 
producing  the  cloth.  Experts  have  estimated  that  in  1895,  *80.000.000 
was  paid  for  labor  in  the  cotton  manufacture  in  the  United  States. 
Assume  that  the  improved  loom  had  been  thoroughly  introduced,  the 
saving  secured  thereby  would  have  been  approximately  *20. 000.000. 
The  interest  <>n  the  national  debt  of  the  United  state-  in'  1892,  the  last 
year  of  Republican  control,  was  $22,893,000.  The  possible  saving  of 
the  new  loom,  therefore,  would  be  about  seven-eighths  of  this  interest." 
— [Hon.  Charles  Warren  Lippitt,  ex-Governor  of  Bhodt  Island. 


B  MODEL  LOOM  TAKE-UP. 

This   take-up   derives   its    motion   from   the   rocking  of  the 
lay-sword.     It  has  a  let-hack  governed  from  the  fork-slide.    Cut 

also  illustrates  the  weft-hammer  and  shipper  knock-off. 


T  MODEL  TAKE-UP. 


Tim  take-up  is  extremely  simple,  as  will  be  seen  by  the 
cut.  It  is  operated  by  a  cam  on  the  lower  loom  -halt  and  so 
timed  that  it  will  not  take  up  unles-  the  shuttle  is  picked.  This 
prevents  the  thin  places  which  arc  sometimes  formed  on  common 
and  old  Northrop  looms  if  the  weaver  turns  the  loom  over  by 
hand  while  mending  warp  or  before  starting  the  shipper.  The 
ratchet  shaft  operates  through  a  worm  to  the  take-up  roll — no 
chance  for  back  lash  of  gears.  A  is  the  upright  connecting  to 
the  left-hand  fork  and  B  the  lever  connecting  to  the  arresting 
device. 


io3 


SECTION    OF    B  MODEL  LOOM  CUT-MOTION  WITH 
FULL  TEN-INCH  ROLL  OF  CLOTH. 

This  cut  is  interesting  in  comparison  with  our  later  motion, 
which  lias  mam  additional  advantages.  The  fliter  or  reed- 
holder  shown  is  not  now  used. 


io4 


ORIGINAL    HIGH    ROLL    CUT-MOTION    FOR    E 

MODEL    LOOM. 

The   cut  illustrates   our  earliest   pattern   of  High    Roll  cut- 
motion.     It  was  quickly  superseded  by  the  next  type  shown. 


io5 


DETAIL    OF    THE    CLOTH    WINDING    DEVICE    OR 
CUT-MOTION  ON  OUR  HIGH-ROLL  TAKE-UP. 

This  is  the  cut-motion  which  lias  been  an  integral  part  of  the 
greater  number  of  Northrop  Looms  sold.  It  has  been  univer- 
sally satisfactory  on  the  average  line  of  goods.  Certain  cloth, 
however,  requires  greater  chance  to  yield  between  the  fell  and 
the  take-up  roll,  and  we  have  therefore  made  a  new  construc- 
tion shown  on  the  following  page,  which  allows  various  changes 
in  wind. 


io6 


*l  "»  fl 


OUR    LATEST    ARRANGEMENT    OF    CUT    MOTION. 

As  will  be  noted  in  the  cross-section  of  a  Northrop  loom, 
as  shown  in  the  cut.  we  have  recently  made  a  material  modifica- 
tion in  our  Cut  Motion,  in  order  to  cover  various  requirements 
of  weaving,  it  being  found  necessary  in  certain  instances  to  have 
a  greater  length  of  cloth  from  the  reed  to  the  take-up  roll  than 
our  former  high-roll  arrangement  allowed. 


io: 


This  arrangement  allows  four  different  systems  of  controll- 
ing the  cloth  between  the  recti  and  the  roll.  The  purchaser  of 
the  loom  can  therefore  suit  himself  as  to  the  method  employed 
and  adapt  the  method  to  the  goods.  The  take-up  roll  is  given  a 
wide  range  ol*  vertical  adjustment  to  allow  for  lessening  the 
strain  on  either  the  top  or  hottom  shade,  as  desired. 

The  large  cut  shows  a  cross-section  of  the  loom  without  the 
hopper,  in  order  to  emphasize  the  main  feature  of  the  new  parts 
and  the  three  lower  cuts  show  the  alternate  methods  of  use. 


BRAKE  MECHANISM. 

We  employ  a  simple  and  convenient  filling-brake  of  our 
own  design,  which  is  actuated  whenever  the  shipper  is  released. 
We  formerly  put  these  hrakes  on  every  loom  we  made,  no 
matter  what  the  style  of  weaving.  Finding,  however,  after  con- 
siderable experience,  that  the  action  of  any  braking  device  is  had 
for  the  loom  in  general,  we  prefer  now  to  apply  brakes  only  to 
the  special  weaves  where  they  seem  peculiarly  necessarv. 

The  illustration  on  the  next  page  shows  the  brake  attached 
to  the  frog  in  usual  manner,  also  an  independent  brake  actuator 
liberated  by  the  shipper  handle.  -V  is  a  rod  leading  across  the 
loom  to  operate  the  belt  shipper  on  the  other  side  of  the  loom. 
B  shows  a  detail  of  the  filling-brake  lock  which  is  liberated  by 
the  weaver  before  moving  the  lay  by  hand. 

It  would  be  found  by  close  examination,  that  the  filling- 
brakes  on  the  ordinary  looms  used  in  the  ordinary  mills,  are  not 
continuously  operative:  in  fact,  it  is  probable  that  the  great 
majority  do  not  act  as  they  should.  Our  own  brake  ha-  the 
advantage  of  a  positive   screw  adjustment   by   which    it  maybe 


ioS 


kept  easily  adjusted :  hut  it  increases  repairs  of  various  kinds 
enormously  to  stop  looms  suddenly,  and  there  is  no  need  of  such 
quick  stopping  in  the  ordinary  line  of  weaving. 


BRAKE    MECHANISM    USED  OX  B  MODEL  LOOM. 


"Some  people  say  that  the  Draper  loom  is  apt  to  make  thin  stripes, 
bat  fnun  all  I  can  hear,  thin  stripes  are  about  as  scarce  as  hen's  teeth. 
The  work  runs  very  well,  and  .Jesse  Barton,  an  18  loom  weaver,  says  he 
ran  a  loom  seven  hoars  and  never  stopped,  only  for  dinner  hour.  It  is 
a  common  thing  Cor  looms  to  run  four  or  five  hours  at  a  stretch." — 
[From  letter  to  Textile  Excelsior  from  Warrenville,  8.  C,  during  1900. 


ICK) 


THE  IMPROVED  DURKIX  THIX  PLACE  PREVENTER. 


We  applied  thousands  of  these  attachments  to  the  old  com- 
mon looms  before  entering  the  loom  field.  Those  who  wish  to 
get  the  best  results  out  of  their  old  looms  when  weaving  light 
goods  can  use  them  to  great  advantage.  They  lessen  thin  and 
thick  places,  lessen  the  results  of  shuttle  smashes,  lessen  warp 
breakage,  and  increase  production.  We  recommend  them  to 
purchasers  of  our  Northrop  Looms  who  intend  to  weave  light 
goods  on  them.  Every  improvement  that  tends  to  lessen  the 
breakage  of  warp  threads  is  of  high  importance  when  endeavor- 
ing to  increase  the  number  of  looms  per  operative.  A  slight 
extra  cost  at  the  start  may  pay  for  itself  main  times  and  not 
always  receive  due  credit  for  the  performance. 

The  construction  consists  of  a  pair  of  arms  fastened  to  the 
usual  bar  across  the  loom  which  supports  or  forms  the  whip 
roll,  and  a  roller  held  at  its  ends  by  the  sliding  bearings,  noted 
in  the  cut  by  the  open  hole  for  the  journal.  Where  Bartlett  let- 
offs  are  in  use  the  regular  roll  may  be  used  without  necessity  for 
an  additional  warp  roller. 

In  our  first  patterns  there  was  difficulty  at  times  in  adjust- 
ing the  tension  of  the  spring  to  allow  definite  control  of  the 
movement  of  the  whip  roll.  We  have  now  overcome  this 
trouble  by  using  uniform  spring  tension  and  governing  the 
movement  by  adjustable  stops  as  shown.  We  make  patterns  to 
fit  different  styles  of  looms. 


I  IO 


SULLIVAN'S  PATENT  SHUTTLE  GUARD. 


These  Shuttle  Guards  arc  made  of 
the  best  quality  coppered  wire,  five- 
sixteenths  of  an  inch  in  diameter,  and 
are   long  enough    to    reach    the   entire 

length  of  the  hand-rail.  An  eve  is 
formed  in  each  end,  and  these  eves  fit 
over  the  bolts  which  attach  the  hand- 
rail to  the  swords.  No  other  fastening 
is  required,  except  for  certain  widths 
of  looms,  when  a  center  support  is 
added.  The  guard  fits  closelv  to  the 
hand-rail  lor  about  three  inches  at  each 
end  and  is  then  bent  to  hang  over  the 
race  in  any  position  desired. 

This  form  of  construction  and  at- 
tachment makes  the  most  simple  and 
durable  shuttle  guard  that  has  thus  far 
been  introduced. 

The  hand-rail  is  not  cut  or  dam- 
aged in  any  way  in  making  the  attach- 
ment, nor  are  there  any  bolts,  screws, 
or  other  fastening,  such  as  have  to  be 
used  with  other  guards,  to  work  loose 
and  annoy  and  hinder  the  weavers. 
There  are  no  bolt  ends  projecting  back 
of  hand-rail  to  tear  the  harness.  This 
guard  can  be  applied  for  repairs  where 
it  would  otherwise  be  necessary  to  re- 
new the  hand-rail,  at  less  than  half  the 
cost  of  making  and  fitting  a  new  hand-rail.  There  are  thou- 
sands of   them  in  use. 


THE  BOLTON  LOOM-SEAT. 


This  novel  attachment  can  be  applied  to  any  of  our  looms 
and  is  now  sent  out  with  all  orders,  one  to  each  eighl  looms.  It 
provides  a  seat  for  the  operative  that  is  normally  held  out  of  the 
way  by  a  spring. 

Fig.  i  shows  the  seat  as  held  down  hv  the  weaver's  weight. 
Fig.  2  shows  it  returned  to  position  under  control   of   it-   spring. 

Mr.  T.  II.  Rennie,  Superintendent  of  the  Graniteville  Mfg. 
Co.,  wrote  ns  he  considered  these  seats  an  "Indispensable  ad- 
junct to  a  well  regulated  weave-room!* 


THE  KEEXE  DRAWING-IN  FRAME. 

W  e  are  introducing  a  drawing-in  frame  with  attachments. 
especially  designed  for  holding  the  warp,  drop  wire  detectors, 
harness,  and  reed  in  a  new  and  convenient  manner,  to  assist  the 
operative  in  drawing  in  a  large  number  of  warp  ends  in  a  given 
time.  There  has  heen  some  objection  to  the  use  of  warp-stop- 
motions  in  that  they  caused  extra  expense  for  drawing  in  :  but 
this  delect  i-  largely  obviated  by  this  present  invention.  Its 
parts  are  adjustable,  and  have  a  range  so  that  they  are  applicable 
to  all  our  various  forms  of  warp  stop-motions.  Price  recently 
reduced  one-half. 


"3 


SPECIFICA7FONS    OF   NORTHROP 
LOOMS 

Ordered  From  the  Draper  Company,  Hopedale,  Mass. 

Make  out  separate  specifications  for  each  style  and  size  of   loom. 


For Date  ordered 190 

Address 

Number Si/e  Model 

Right-Hand  Belt  from  Above Left-Hand  Belt  from  Above 

Right-Hand  Belt  from  Below Left-Hand  Belt  from  Below 

Kind  of  Cloth  to  be  woven. Width   Sley 

Number  of  Picks  per  inch Number  of  threads  in  Warp 

Number  of  Warp  Yarn      Number  of  Filling  Yarn 

Shall  Looms  be  duplicate  of  others  in  the  Mill? 

If  so,  give  date  of  previous  order    

Is  rilling  on  Bobbins  or  Cops  ?     .Total  length  of  Bobbin  or  C<  >ps 

Note:  —  It  is  necessary  to  send  several  sample  cops  with  mule 
spindle,  or  bobbin  and  spindle.  Our  regular  sizes  of 
bobbins  take  ^  1-2  inch  traverse  on  a  bobbin  6  3-4 
inches  long;  6  i-S  inches  on  a  bobbin  7  3-8  inches 
long;  and  a  6  3-4  inch  traverse  on  a  bobbin  8  inches 
long.  Our  regular  cop  sizes  are  5  1-2,  6  i-S  and  6  3-4 
traverse.  Bobbins  are  patented,  and  must  be  ordered 
through  us.  At  least  200  per  loom  should  be  pro- 
vided. When  cops  are  used  we  send  30  skewers  with 
each  loom  lor  large  battery;  20  skewers  with  each 
loom  for  small  battery.     These  are  charged  extra. 


XI4 


Shall  we  make  Bobbin  or  Cop  Heads  Standard  Butt? 

Give  largest  diameter  of  full  filling  Bobbin  or  Cop  measured  on 

the  Yarn 

Large  or  Small  Battery?  _... Diameter  of  Spinning  Ring 

Note: — Large  Battery  takes  25  bobbins  or  cops.     Small  bat- 
tery takes  15  bobbins  or  cops. 

What  style  of  Take-up? 

Note  :  —  Our  "  High  Roll  "  construction  admits  of  winding  any 

diameter  Cloth  Roll  up  to   17  inches.     Embodied 

with  this  we  have  three  separate  styles  of  Take-up. 

Our  regular  pattern  takes  up  with  every  pick  and  lets 

back  to  prevent  thin  places. 
Our  Worm  Take-up  is  a  positive  take-up.  without  the 
let-back   feature,    and   is    especially    designed    for 
corduroys,  velvets  and  similar  fabrics,  which  re- 
quire 200  picks  per  inch  and  above. 
Our  Worm    Take-up    with     let-back    is    designed    for 
those  who  require  a  positive  take-up  and  still  de- 
sire the  let-back  feature. 
Our  Standard    Take-up   has   1   1-4  inch  up  and  down 
adjustment    of  sand   roll.       If    more    is   required, 
please  specif v. 

What  style  of  Let-off? 

Note: — We    furnish    Roper.     Bartlett.    Friction.     Roper    and 
Friction,  or  Bartlett  and  Friction  combined. 
On  "  F"  Model  looms  we  furnish  Compound  Let-off: 
on  Corduroy  looms  we  furnish  a  special  Let-off. 
If    Friction    Let-off,    shall    we     order    Chain.     Fibre,   or   Rope 

Friction  :  

Will  you  have  Drag  Rolls? 

Note:  —  These  are   used  onlv  for  very  heavy   weaves:   heavy 
denims  and  goods  of  this  character. 
We    recommend    for    most    cloths  Plain    Pipe    Whip 


"5 


Rolls;  for  heavy  weaves,  not  taking  Drag  Rolls, 
Vibrating  Whip  Rolls;  for  very  light  weaves, 
Durkin  Thick  and  Thin  Place  Preventors.  Un- 
less Vibrating  Whip  Rolls,  Thick  and  Thin 
Place  Preventors  or  Drag  Rolls  are  specified,  we 
shall  furnish  with  plain  Pipe  Roll. 

Will  you  have  Feeler? : 

What  style  Warp  Stop-Motion  is  required?  

NOTE  :  — We  have  three  styles  : 

Steel   harness  using  one  steel  heddle   for  every  warp 

thread,  adapted  for  2-3-4  ;,!1(^  5  harness  work. 
Drop-wire    Stop-motion    for     cotton     harness,    which 
requires  one  drop  wire  for  every  two  warp  threads 
in    a   two-harness    loom    adapted  for   2-3-4  an^  5 
harness  work. 
Single  Thread  or   Lease-rod  Stop-motion    for   cotton 
harness,    using    one    drop    wire    for    every    warp 
thread.       This    stop-motion    is    adapted     for    any 
number  of  harness  from  2  up. 
Drop  Wires    and    Ileddles  are   extras    and   should    he 
ordered  in  sufficient  quantities  for  extra  drawing-in 
sets.      It   is  well   to  order  about  20  per  cent,  more 
drop   wires   or    heddles  than  the   looms  figure  for 
this  purpose. 

How  many  Steel  Ileddles  o]-  Drop  Wires? 

How  many  looms  arranged  for  2  Harnesses? 

How   many  looms  arranged  for  3  Harnesses?     H<>\\ 

mam   up?         How  many  down? 

How  main   looms  arranged  for  .4  Harnesses?  How 

many  up? How  many  down? 

How  main'  looms  arranged  for  5  Harnesses?.  How 

many  up?       How  many  down? 

What  style  Harness  Motion? 


n6 


Note:  — We  furnish  the  regular  Top  Harness-motion  or  Sick- 
top  Compensating  Motion. 
We  adapt  our  looms  to  take   either  the   Crompton  or 

Stafford  Dobby. 
We   also  furnish  Special  Side  Cam  Motion  for  Cordu- 
roys. 

Are  Cams  on  Cam  Shaft  or  Auxiliary  Shaft? 

If  Auxiliary  Shalt,  shall  we  send  gears  to  run  2-3-4-:;  shade? 

Single  or  Douhle  Jack  Hooks? 

On  what  Xo.  of   Harness  shall  we  set  up  looms? How 

many  up? How  many  down? 

Shall  we  supply  Dobby? How  many  Harnesses? 

What  style?.... 

Shall    we    supply    Single    or    Douhle    Spring    Jack    or     Direct 

Springs  ?.... 

Is  Selvage  Motion  required? Plain  or  Tape? 

What  Diameter  and  Face  of  Driving  Pulley? What 

width  of   Belt? 

Tight  and  Loose  or  Friction  Pulley?  

Note: —  Regular  size  12  inches  diameter,  2  1-4  inches  face,  for 
2S  inch  loom.  14  inches  diameter,  2  1-4  inches 
face,  for  40  inch  loom.  We  strongly  recommend 
this  width  of  face,  as  wider  pulleys  are  much 
more  troublesome  in  shifting  belts. 
For  2  1-2  inch  belts  and  wider,  we  recommend  fric- 
tion pulleys. 
We    furnish     16    1-2    inch,    iS    inch    and    20    inch    Beam    Heads. 

Which  do  you  require? 

Distance  between  Heads  ? 

Note:  —  For  proper  width  between  Beam  Heads,  we  recom- 
mend 4  inches  more  than  size  of  loom.  For 
those  desiring  extra  space  Ave  supply  Beams  g  ]-z 
inches  wider  than  the  size  of  loom. 


ii7 


We  furnish    5    inch   and   6   inch    diameter  Yarn    Beams.      Which 

do  you  require  ? 

Note:  —  We  recommend  6  inch  barrel  only  on  tine  yarns. 

How  main  extra  Shuttles? (Only  one  per  loom  included 

without  extra  cost.) 
What  style  Temple  will  you  have.  1  3-4  or  2  1-2  Roll? 

How  many  Bobbins  shall  we  order  for  you? .Style 

Oil  soaked   

For  what  number  of  picks  shall  we  set  up  looms?  

Note  :  —  Send  us  several  pieces  of  reed  such  as  you  intend  using 
on  these  looms.  One  piece  is  not  sufficient.  As 
the  contraction  on  our  High  Roll  Take-up  is  con- 
siderably  less  on  several  classes  of  weaves  than  on 
other  looms,  it  would  be  well  to  write  us  before 
ordering  new  reeds.  The  maximum  reed  space 
is  s;  inches  wider  than  the  size  of  the  loom. 
Pickers  must  be  of  short  pattern,  not  projecting  above 

shuttle  box. 
We  furnish  sample  sets  of  strapping  and  pickers  with- 
out extra  charge. 
On  Corduroy  looms  send  us  copy  of  Chain  Draft. 
We    will    send    diagrams     of     floor     plan     after     questions     are 

answered. 
By  what  lines  shall  we  ship? 
Remarks 


"The  Northrop  Loom,  by  increasing  the  capacity  of  the  operative 
300  per  cent.,  has  brought  the  manufacture  i>f  cotton  up  t"  a  point  thai 
i-  considered  practically  perfect.  In  its  must  highly  developed  form 
this  loom  now  enables  one  man  to  <\<>  the  work  of  a  thousand  men  at  the 
beginning  of  the  cotton  industry,  working  by  hand.""—  From  artich  on 
"Evolution  of  the  Cotton  Industry,"  in  Gunton'a  Magdzim  for  Feb..  1904. 


n8 


O 

M 

co 

o 

c 

- 

o 
w 

s 

C 

a 

K 

s 

o 

1— 1 

1 

=1 

1 

Proper  Width 

Between 

Beam 

Heads 

23 

S  w  -*  o  oc    c   ?i  t   •-   z   c   :i  t 

---    30   C   (M   ■«*   ;•?   S 

bet. 

©   C«   **H   CO   QC    O    7!    t    c    00   O    «    i< 
55   cc   cc   55   cc   -f   -r   -r   t   -r    ic    ir:    ia 

s  00  a  cm  ;t  ic  x 

Greatest  Width 

of 

Cloth 

at  Temple 

*   -  ^  u;  1-  a  -<  w  m  1-  c:  h  co 

?(    W    W    X    ^    ^    t    T    t    -t    -r    1:    iff 

IO   l-  O)   H   CO  IO  l- 

ir?   Da   E   CO  CO  0  ob 

bin- 

c  o 

c.  -h   ?:  m  1-  0  h   ?;  m  i-  c.   -h   ^ 
ct   re   re   ce  cc   co  -f   -r   -r   -r   -t   ua   iq 

IO   NOHCO   IO    l- 

iC    U3    »C7    —     —    CEJ    CO 

Total  Length 

of  Multiple 

Steel  Harness 

Space 

a 

2  if 
IS 

CCCOWKTT-t^tiniffiCiO 

CO    O    ?!    -f    «E    X    O 
lO    O    CD    CC    CC    CO    L- 

b*v- 
c  o 

c    :t    -t    c    CO    O    ?!   i<    'J    GO    O    W   't 
CCCOCOCOCOT'T't't'fitliOiO 

C    »   O   «    •♦    !£    00 

ic  *o  c  c  e  c  'r 

Total  Length 

of 

Cotton  Harness 

Space 

ID 

ccco^-^-^-ti-jH-^ioihiciicio 

0  ca  -*  so  00  0  ea 

•c  :  c  s  0  t-  c- 

.5  'C 

en* 

00   O   Ci   -f   cc   00  0 
•0  CC   CO   CC   CO    —   t- 

Length  of  Lay 

~  for 
1.7' ,  Shuttle 
8      Bobbin 

3-g 

00  0  O!  *t  c  x  a  w  f  0  a  c  ?-i 
L-  00  00  cc  x  x  os   -.  cc  5:  S5   5 ■  0 

•t   1:  x   ;  01  ^  : 

CS   O   O   r-l   1-1   t-i   1H 

bj)s- 

.E.c 

en* 

X  -;'  _;'  „;'  *  £  >R  *  J'  >R  >R  >R  J'  >R  *  >R  .;'  ^  _;'  „" 

—     X    ^    CM   ■*    CD   00    O    eM^epcOOCvl^epobOCM** 

Length  of  Lay 
foi- 
151  i  Shuttle 
7:,H  Bobbin 

3-i: 

T-  0  h  in  10  T-  os  i-t  w  10  T-  Si  >h 

l-   l-   CO   00   60  CO   00  Gl   01   Cl   01   ci    0 

cc  ic  T-  Si  ^  5r  ic 

.Srg 

i/j"' 

U3&0)HCQIQ]>0>HMtOt>    Cl 

i-    i-    1-    CO    00    00    00    CO   Cl    Cl    01    Cl    01 

-    t    -t    -    -    t    t 

H   ffi   IS  &  O)   ri   M 

90     0     0      O      --I      "-H 

7;.        ^~ 

3-g 

1- 

*^   X   O    ?1   -t   C    00   O   W   -t    ffl   X   Q 
L-    L-    00    00    00    CO    00    Cl    Cl    C    S    C.    _ 

C>!    ri-    SO    X'    O    CM    ri- 

O    O    0    O   ~->    —1    ri 

■Hfi 
c/:  ^ 

i>    O    X    O   »l   ■«    C    CO   O   ?H    12   X 

1  -  1  -  1  -  00  00  00  oc  00  c:  ci  c-.  c.  c. 

O   CM  ^  CO   00   O   CM 

u      5 
.S"S  x 

co  00  0  ei  •*  cc  x.  9  nj  a  qo  0 

H  ■*  CO  CO  O  M   J 

»r:  j(t  ic  ire  co  co  co 

II9 


Proper  Width 

Between 
Beam 
Heads 

u 

o  c 

f^  «-  i-  i~  t-  oo  oo  d 

if.  ~ 

—  ?■  —  --   x   r  ?<  -r 

L-    »-    I-    I-    l-    00    X    30 

Greatest  Width 
of 
Cloth 
at  Temple 

-  z 

SHMIOt-OlHffi 
--    i-    1-    1-    i-    i-    X    00 

^    [t   I-   !-   1-   b-    X    X 

Total  Length 

of  Multiple 

Steel  1  [arness 

Space 

u 

-  c 

1-    I-    I-    L-    X    X    X    00 

Q 

Q 

1)       . 

rz    ?!   -f    -X    X    O    ?!   -f 

i-  i-  i-  i-  i-  x  x  x 

Total  Length 

of 

Cotton  Harness 

Space 

go 

I-    I-    I-    X    X    X    X    00 

o 
i 

:/  - 

B   C 

■?.~ 

N-*«0000(M-*<0 
L-    «.-    L-    L-    00    X    00    00 

1 
— 
— 

1 

w 

1 

Q 

Length  of  Lav 

for 

l.V,  Shuttle 

<s     Bobbin 

■J 

X     3     ?!     —     i     X     S     ?! 
—    ?!    ?!    ?!    ?!?!???? 

_'     _'     „'     _'     _"'  _'     _'     _'' 
—     A     —     ?!    —    -X     X    O 
——?!?!    ?!     ?!     ?!    55 

Length  >>\'  Lav 
for 

I.V  „  Shuttle 

1%  Bobbin 

_o 
l| 

-------- 

i"-  =-.  —  So  7c.   i~-   ~.   — 

—     —     ?!?!?!?!?!?? 

—  ^ 

b  : 

-------- 

i-   ~-   T.   —   T-.   7-   7.   — 

———?■?!?!?■?■ 

-  j  - 

-  53 

'—          Z  — 

z  ux  z 
-■!/- 

s  =■•- 

5  -r 

5  =  S  H  S  3  i'  S 

B  C 

55  — 

E 
/  -  : 

sogon^oaic 

u   ^  U   u   ^  ^> 

X   —  —   X   — — 

O    O  U    'J    '-J  ^ 


_  11. 


n      o  w   -b   co  o  = 


I  I  I  I  II  I  I 


OOOoOOOOOO-^u 

:^_:  —  •  —  -  -  5° 

ooGoooooou  =  s 

CJ  U  U  U   '_-    u    U    U    U    U    jj    ;J 

o6o6xxx>xo6o6oox  >_^- 

V  V  V  V    U    U    U    i>    u    u  ~*    ^ 

occQWcccsMmmmca  g  . 

~  T  ^~~~"T  -  u  -  £ 

abooaoabaocceoii: 
I —  —  —  ?<  ?i  ?i  ?i  ?i  —   :f 

oooooooooo*>'3 


*3  = 


■r  g 


~~ 


- .  —  ■-  x  —  t  >  —  ~  s.  ~  7>~  ■-  x  —  -•  —  -^  s  —  -•  — 


■J 


eDfc-fc-fc-fc-fc-ooooooaoaoasaaaaosJSooooOi-i 


es  JJ  o 

:  -  q,     t-fc-fc- t-aoooooooooos  osastttS©  ooo  c 


=  —  = 
-  _  £3 


-  0« 


?'■     ?, V, r; ^, S5z;ns^i^;H£^ ^ ~  ■;  *  s ?.- 


c    i    -    - 


z  -  - 
■    r    I 


-c '—  c       —  x  r:  ?•  —  \z.y.~  7'.  —  ■-  y.  ~  -■  —  ■-/■-■?<  —  ■-  y 

■-  -  o      —  — « -  >  -  i  -  >  -  i  -  y.  s.  s.  s.  x  ~  ~  —.  —  —  2  ~  -  —  c 


u  «  £  fl* 

o  —  ^  o 

§3  £  = 

pa 

§SS 

u 

reates 
Vidth 

rcioti 

Temp 

•-H   gs  «g 

O"  ow 

n 

—      15 

—  'j  { 

5I~   £ 

u 

^"=-  ej 

?!   -t    eg 

u 

Sa    as    as 

-^-■t: 

4J<m    V 

KJ 

£o2 

3^ 

K 

— 

O 

c 

&H 

^   § 

W 

s 

K 

"Si     g 

£ 

o 

E      5  o 

0 

o 

PQ 
0 

■<■--  H 

3;  S  5 

U 

O 

a       gw 

CJ 

J 

£ 

o      — 

JZ 

5 

Q 

*   5 

30 

0 

fc 

c 

« 

0 

a      u 

g 

4 

»    5    M 

L-     00    00 

pq 

03 

> 

u 
c 

.__, 

X 

"       u  r 

pj    a| 

o  .     ~  — 

-       -       - 

'- 

_  c  —  - 
—  —  y;  :; 

b-     OS     r-j 

t-     i-      Z 

e 

6t         '    r 

•— 

-        7~~ 

'-,        —" 

g 

~ 

0 

c 

X 

'_ 

1      «  = 

c 

111  0 

for 
Shi 
Bob 

S  ff  3 

C 

it       •'  _ 

1 

'-.      —  - 

- 

-" 

H 

: 
|Z 

.So  ° 

/,   5    ?: 

in    j 

INSTRUCTIONS  FOR  RUNNING 
NORTHROP  LOOMS. 

The  experience  of  the  last  nine  years  is  by  no  means  suffi- 
cient to  absolutely  settle  all  points  of  discussion.  We  learn 
more  about  the  art  of  weaving  every  week,  and  consider  the 
possibilities  of  further  knowledge  and  improvement  practically 
exhaustless.  Many  volumes  have  already  been  written  about 
the  detail  of  plain  weaving  with  common  looms,  so  we  shall  try 
to  stick  more  closely  to  the  new  features  introduced  by  the  novel 
mechanisms  on  our  own  looms. 

While  these  new  devices  necessarily  introduce  new  prob- 
lems, there  is  nothing  very  intricate  about  their  operation. 
The  fact  that  thousands  have  been  running  for  years  should  give 
the  Fixers  sell"  confidence. 


HOPPER    (OR    BATTERY)    ADJUST- 
MENT 

In  setting  the  Hopper,  first  see  that  the  filling-fork  passes 
freely  through  the  grate.  Then  place  the  filling-motion  finger 
against  the  filling-fork  slide,  and  the  lever  on  the  starting  rod  at 
the  hopper  side  of  the  loom,  to  which  the  starting  rod  spring  is 
connected,  can  then  be  set  so  as  to  cause  the  shuttle  position 
detector  to  clear  the  shuttle  when  the  lav  is  at  its  extreme  forward 
position.  Then  turn  the  loom  and  allow  the  tilling  fork  to 
engage  with  the  filling-motion  hook,  which  will  cause  the  starting 
rod   to   turn,  and   bring   the   shuttle   position  detector  across  the 


I  23 


mouth  of  the  shuttle  box.  The  end  of  the  shuttle  position  detec- 
tor  should  come  very  close  to  the  back  box  plate,  when  the  lay  is 
all  the  way  forward. 

The  position  of  the  detector  should  be  3  15-16  inches  from 
the  hopper  surface  against  which  the  butt  of  the  bobbin  is 
pressed  to  the  inner  face  of  the  detector.  To  see  if  the  detector 
works  properly,  pull  the  shuttle  far  enough  out  of  the  box  so 
that  it  will  strike  it.  This  should  cause  the  latch-finger  on  the 
hopper  to  clear  the  bunter  as  the  lay  conies  forward  and  the 
detector  contacts  with  the  tip  of  the  shuttle.  To  see  if  the 
transferrer  acts  properly,  bring  the  lay  forward  with  the  shuttle 
in  proper  position,  until  the  bunter  contacts  with  the  latch-finger, 
and  as  the  transferrer  inserts  the  fresh  bobbin,  or  cop,  note  how 
far  it  is  pressed  into  the  shuttle.  Should  it  go  too  far  down 
and  push  the  bobbin  by  the  shuttle  spring  centre,  the 
latch-finger  must  be  set  further  back  by  means  of  the  adjusting 
screw  at  the  rear.  Should  the  bobbin,  or  cop,  not  go  down  far 
enough  into  the  spring  to  be  firmly  held,  the  latch-finger 
must  be  set  nearer  the  bunter.  In  setting  the  transferrer, 
it  should  be  regulated  so  that  it  will  contact  very  lightly 
with  the  bobbin,  or  cop,  which  has  been  placed  in  the  shuttle 
when  the  transferrer  is  at  the  end  of  the  downward  stroke. 
The  wrought  iron  end  of  the  transferrer,  called  the  trans- 
fcrrer-fork,  which  helps  to  press  the  bobbin,  or  cop,  into  the 
shuttle,  should  be  directly  over  the  centre  of  the  shuttle 
opening,  and  if  out  of  position,  should  he  bent  into  place. 

When  the  shuttle  position  detector  is  in  proper  position  and 
clears  the  shuttle  tip.  and  the  latch  finger  contacts  properly  with 
the  bunter,  bring  the  lay  slowly  forward  by  hand,  and  see  that  the 
transferrer  places  the  bobbin,  or  cop,  exactly  in  the  centre  of  the 
shuttle.  If  the  shuttle  should  come  too  far  forward  or  too  far 
hack,  the  proper  position  may  be  secured  by  tinning  the  eccentric 
pins  in  the  lay  sword  upon  which  the  pitman   works.      Be  careful 


•-4 


and  turn  both  pins,  or  else  the  lay  will  have  a  complex  motion, 
for  one  distance  between  centres  will  be  longer  than  the  other. 
If  the  pitman  is  too  badly  worn  to  allow  of  this  adjustment,  it 
should  be  replaced  by  a  new  one. 

If,  by  reason  of  a  badly  worn  picker,  the  bobbin,  or  cop.  is 
placed  in  the  shuttle  so  as  to  strike  high  up  on  the  shuttle  cover. 
an  additional  piece  of  leather  should  be  put  under  the  leather  on 
the  lay  end.  to  compensate  for  the  wear  of  the  picker. 

The  foregoing  adjustments  will  remedy  any  ordinary  trouble. 
not  occasioned  by  breakage.  The  hopper,  as  a  rule,  gives  very 
little  trouble  and  requires  scarcely  any  adjustment. 

The  rotation  of  the  hopper  disc  should  always  bring  a  bobbin 
into  proper  position.  The  disc  bearing  should  be  kept  properly 
oiled,  care  being  taken  not  to  drip  oil  on  the  bobbins.  If  the 
weavers  leave  gaps  between  bobbins  when  filling  the  hopper, 
they  may  have  trouble.  They  should  not  allow  these  gaps  to 
occur,  as  it  is  perfectly  easy  to  turn  the  hopper  back  and  fill  it 
properly. 


SHUTTLES. 

The   latest  Northrop  shuttle  takes  either  bobbins  or  cops. 

It  is  shaped  to  prevent  rilling  from  throwing  forward  and 
escaping  from  the  eye.  or  looping  around  the  horn.  As 
fastened  in  the  wood,  there  is  no  chance  for  catching  either 
filling  or  warp  threads. 

The  spring  cover  at  the  rear  is  inclined  so  that  if  the  shuttle 
is  too  far  into  the  box.  the  bobbin,  when  striking  the  incline,  can 
push  the  shuttle  into  place  so  that  the  bobbin  can  enter  the  spring 
properly. 


It  the  thread  entrances  to  the  eye  get  jammed  or  closed,  they 
can  be  opened  by  knife  blade,  or  other  tool,  but  care  should  be 
taken  not  to  open  these  entrances  any  wider  than  they  were 
originally. 

It"  the  eye  becomes  clogged  with  cotton  or  lint,  it  should  be 
cleaned  out. 

A  small  piece  of  flannel  is  placed  at  the  throat  of  the 
shuttle  for  friction,  which  can  he  easily  renewed.  When  coarse 
rilling  is  used,  it  may  he  necessary  to  put  bunches  of  slasher- 
waste,  or  bristles,  through  holes  in  the  side  of  the  shuttle,  to 
make  additional  friction.  These  must  he  put  in  by  the  loom 
fixers,  as  we  cannot  send  them  out  in  this  way,  not  knowing  just 
what  conditions  arise  in  weaving. 

If  the  shuttle  spring  gets  loose,  it  should  he  tightened  up  by 
turning  the  fastening  screw.  Shuttles  should  not  be  allowed  to 
run  with  loose  spring's.  We  believe  we  have  made  considerable 
improvement  in  this  direction  by  our  latest  spring  and  fastening. 

If  trouble  is  found  with  cut  filling,  the  wood  near  the  shuttle 
eye  may  have  become  rough,  and  should  be  smoothed  with  line 
sand  paper,  or  emery.  Any  small  slivers  or  sharp  edges  should 
be  removed  by  the  same  means. 

If  warp  threads  should  be  broken  out  by  the  shuttle,  it  may 
be  that  the  tips  are  blunt  or  rough,  in  which  case  the  trouble  may 
be  remedied  by  polishing  with  emery  cloth. 


SHUTTLE   BREAKAGE. 

Outside  of  the  usual  splintering  and  slivering,  generally 
caused  by  untit  wood,  the  actual  breakage  of  shuttles  on  Northrop 
looms  is  probably  <\\\l'  to  the  following  causes: 


126 


The  shuttle  may  get  pinched  between  the  temple  and  the 
reed,  in  case  the  protector  fails  to  act.  Our  recent  models  of 
temples  are  designed  to  prevent  this  from  happening.  Of 
course,  the  fixer  should  follow  up  his  work  and  see  that  the 
protectors  are  properly  operative. 

Shuttles  have  been  split  by  bobbin  rings  wedging  between 
the  spring  grips,  but  this  is  of  rare  occurrence.  We  grind  the 
ends  of  our  springs  now,  so  as  to  limit  the  chance  of  their  press- 
ing against  the  shuttle  sides.  Of  course,  it  is  possible  to  break 
shuttles,  if  bobbins  are  caught  during  transfer,  or  if  certain 
parts  of  the  loom  are  broken  or  inoperative.  In  spite  of  all  the 
chances,  our  shuttles  wear  very  well,  considering  that  one  shuttle 
runs  continuously,  the  wear  not  being  divided  between  two 
shuttles,  as  in  the  common  loom. 

We  furnish  all  the  shuttles  used  with  our  looms,  so  have  an 
actual  record  of  their  life,  which  runs  over,  rather  than  under, 
six  months  on  the  average.  Excessive  wear  is  often  due  to 
sharp  reeds. 


SHUTTLE    WOOD. 

Shuttle  wood  is  liable  to  curious  variations,  both  from 
natural  and  artificial  causes.  Sometimes  the  stock  is  too 
severely  kiln-dried,  taking  all  the  life  out  of  the  wood  so  that  it 
breaks  like  sealing  wax.  Shuttles  are  sometimes  treated  with 
hot  solutions  of  wax  or  oil.  This  may  improve  the  surface 
smoothness,  but  if  not  carefully  followed  up,  may  injure  the 
stock. 


127 


SHUTTLE   DESIGN. 

Shuttles  are  shaped  to  run  true  and  balance  as  well  as  pos- 
sible.    With   the  weight  continually  changing  and  shifting,  as 

the  yarn  weaves  off,  it  is  impossible  to  keep  the  centre  of 
gravity  in  a  uniform  position.  The  shuttle  is  also  pulled  out  of 
place  by  the  drag  of  the  vain,  which  varies  in  tension  as  the 
bobbin  or  cop  winds  off. 

A  perfect  design  would  have  the  shuttle  points  on  a  line 
that  would  pass  through  the  centre  of  gravity,  with  the  weight 
fairhj  well  distributed  on  each  side  of  the  centre. 

Shuttles  made  for  front-binder  Zooms  have  a  longer  back,  so 
that  the  pressure  of  the  binder  in  its  last  contact  will  not  change 
the  direction  of  the  shuttle.  We  made  all  our  looms  with  back 
binders  for  years,  but  are  now  having  very  good  success  with 
front  binders  on  recent  models. 


MIS  THREADING. 

We  use  this  term  to  illustrate  the  failure  of  the  shuttle  to 
thread  itself  properly.  With  our  recent  shuttles  this  fault  is 
almost  entirely  obviated .  It  is  possible,  however,  it  the  filling  be 
weak,  or  should  the  shuttle  be  picked  too  hard,  that  the  yarn 
may  be  broken  before  it  has  a  chance  to  thread  up.  The  shuttle 
eye  may  possible  get  jammed  or  choked  by  lint  so  that  the 
thread  cannot  enter  at  all.  If  this  happens,  the  fork  will  be 
raised  all  right,  for  the  thread  will  draw  off  the  top  of  the  shuttle 
on  its  firsl  flight.  When  the  shuttle  is  picked  back,  however, 
the  thread  will  be  broken,  calling  for  a  new  transfer  of  filling 
and   making  a  curious  looking  defect  in  the  cloth,  as   the   shuttle 


uS 


will  continue  to  lay  threads  going  from  the  hopper  and  will  lav 
none  on  the  return.  In  weaving  two  shade  goods  this  action 
puts  several  threads  in  one  shade.  In  tact,  it  may  continue  this 
operation  until  all  the  bobbins  have  been  transferred  out  of  the 
hopper.  Our  present  looms  are  so  set  as  to  stop  for  a  double 
misthread,  but  even  this  will  not  prevent  the  fault  just  mentioned, 
as  the  fork  will  be  raised  intermittently.  The  misthread  detector 
on  the  fork  will  act,  however,  if  no  thread  is  laid  in  front  of 
the  fork  twice  running.  It  may  be  possible  for  the  fixer  or  the 
weaver  to  intentionally  disarrange  this  motion  so  as  to  prevent 
the  looms  from  stopping,  but  this  should  not  be  allowed,  as  it 
might  cause  a  bad  thin  place  if  the  hopper  became  exhausted  or 
any  accident  caused  repeated  misthreading.  The  fact  that  the 
loom  is  found  stopped,  even  when  there  is  not  a  warp  break  or 
slack  thread,  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  the  shuttle  has  been 
misthreading.  It  is  possible  that  the  shuttle  position  detector  may 
have  prevented  the  shuttle  from  receiving  a  bobbin  twice  in  suc- 
cession, and  this  would  cause  the  loom  to  stop  just  the  same  as 
if  it  had  failed  to  thread  twice  running.  If  the  loom  is  found 
stopped  with  an  empty  bobbin  in  the  shuttle  it  is  a  sure  sign  that 
the  shuttle  position  detector  has  found  the  shuttle  out  of  place. 
This  means  that  the  pick  should  be  set  so  that  the  shuttle  will  go 
fully  into  the  box  or  not  rebound.  Men  with  inventive  capacity 
often  attempt  to  improve  on  our  shuttle  eve,  and  we  do  not 
assume  that  improvement  is  not  possible  where  we  have  made 
so  many  changes  ourselves.  It  is  necessary,  however,  to  recog- 
nize the  requirements  of  the  case,  as  a  shuttle  eye  for  uni- 
versal use  must  be  adapted  not  only  tor  threading  easily,  but 
also  prevent  the  tilling  from  throwing  ahead  ami  getting  out  of 
the  slot.  It  must  also  provide  for  easy  passage  of  bunches,  be 
practically  self  cleaning,  give  a  proper  friction,  not  weaken  the 
wood  materially,  have  sufficient  weight  to  balance  the  metal 
parts  at  the  other  end,  be   fitted   in  the  wood   so  as  not  to  catch 


129 

warp  or  filling,  and  be  designed  for  eas)  molding  and   machine 

work.  As  to  the  simple  problem  of  threading  shuttles,  as  far 
back  as  1894  we  could  transfer  over  1,000  bobbins  without  a 
misthread.  These  records  cannot  be  attained,  however,  without 
proper  setting  of  the  loom.  We  believe  the  set  of  the  pick  has 
more  to  do  with  this  trouble  than  anything  else,  and  recommend 
a  light,  easv  pick  with  moderate  pressure  of  the  binder.  We 
learned  years  ago  that  the  amount  of  misthreading  was  affected 
by  the  moisture  in  the  weave  room.  Yarn  is  strengthened  by 
moisture  and  strong  yarn  will  naturally  break  less  under  strain 
whether  it  is  filling  or  warp. 


BREAKING   OF  FILLING. 

Every  break  in  the  filling  causes  extra  labor,  as  the  weaver 
must  put  a  bobbin  in  the  hopper  twice  at  least  in  order  to  have 
its  supply  of  filling  woven  off.  Every  bobbin  ought  to  weave  off 
clean,  except  on  feeler  looms,  but  a  harsh  pick  may  break  filling 
by  the  jerk  or  cause  it  to  throw"  out  of  the  shuttle  and  catch 
on  other  adjacent  parts.  Sometimes  the  yarn  wraps  around 
the  point  of  the  bobbin  or  skewer  while  running  off.  With 
our  earlier  shuttle  we  expected  breakage  on  No.  36  tilling  at 
least  one  in  ten  bobbins,  whereas  we  do  not  now  expect  more 
than  one  in  twenty-five.  It  is  easy  to  note  how  filling  is 
running  by  casually  glancing  at  the  hoppers  in  the  weave 
room  to  see  how  main  partly  tilled  bobbins  have  been  put 
back  in  the  hoppers.  Filling  sometimes  catches  on  the  picker  OX 
picker  stick.  Care  should  be  taken  to  allow  no  crack-,  projec- 
tions, or  corners  where  the  thread  may  loop  when  throwing  out 
of   the  shuttle.      With    cop  filling  the  yarn  sometimes   catches   in 


130 


the  slot  of  the  skewer.     More  trouble  is      . ..  sioned  by  split  cops, 

due  either  to  shock  in  the  shuttle  box  or  poor  design  of  spindle 

skewer.     This  fault  can  be  largely  governed  by  the  set  of  the 

pick  and  use  of  proper  checks.  There  arc  many  checks  in  the 
market  which  box  the  shuttle  properly,  but  a  shuttle  must  be 
received  easily  to  prevent  cop  splitting,  and  there  are  very  few- 
checks  which  are  adapted  to  this  requirement  and  also  to  con- 
trolling the  shuttle  properly. 


BOBBINS. 

We  have  received  a  long  and  varied  education  in  the  require- 
ments of  filling  bobbins  as  we  have  purchased  all  of  those  used 
on  our  Northrop  Looms  ever  since  we  commenced  to  build  them. 
The  complaints  of  our  customers  therefore  all  pass  through  our 
own  office,  although  up  to  the  present  time  we  have  not  had  any- 
thing to  do  with  their  manufacture.     Bobbin  wood  is  liable  to 

■us  fluctuation,  especiallv  when  not  carefully  selected  and 
carefully  dried.  We  believe  the  greater  part  of  the  trouble  with 
bins  getting  out  of  shape  is  due  to  short  seasoning,  it  being 
neces-arv  to  carry  a  very  large  stock  of  blanks  in  order  to  have 
sufficient  supply  of  thoroughly  seasoned  wood  on  hand.  Changes 
in  the  wood  itself  not  only  require  reaming  and  the  weeding  out 
of  badly   warped  bobbins,   but  also    cause  loosening  of  the   rings 

re  the  bobbin-  are  otherwise  worn  out.  It  is.  of  course, 
necessary  for  our  loom  that  the  bobbin  rings  should  hold  firmly 
-  that  the  bobbin  will  lie  properly  in  the  shuttle.  We  insist  on 
careful  gauging  of  both  wood  and  rings  at  the  -tart,  but  the  wood 
may  change  after  the  gauging  process.  The  split  rings  applied 
to  the  bobbins  are  necessarily  somewhat  elliptical.      In  order  to 


13I 


obviate  trouble  from  this  source  the  rings  are  applied  so  that  the 

slots  will  not  lie  opposite  each  other.  The  bobbins  will 
swell  if  filling  is  dampened  so  that  they  will  not  fit  the 
spindles.  This  necessitates  reaming,  hut  the  reaming  should 
not  he  done  while  the  bobbins  are  wet,  as  too  much  wood  will 
then  he  removed.  We  are  now  introducing  spindles  with  a  cen- 
trifugal clutch  that  allows  a  loose  fit  with  the  bobbin  on  the 
clutch  and  allows  more  leeway  for  the  fit.  We  believe  this  is 
one  of  the  most  important  improvements  ever  made  in  the  art. 
The  contour  of  the  bobbin  varies  with  the  kind  of  yarn  spun. 
Bobbins  for  coarse  filling  require  coarser  steps  on  the  cone. 
With  coarse  yarn  we  use  \z  steps,  for  print  yarn  14.  For  coarse 
filling  we  usually  recommend  grooves  on  the  barrel  instead  of 
ribs.  We  have  made  careful  experiments  in  order  to  determine 
the  proper  size  of  barrel  for  filling  bobbins,  and  our  standard 
patterns  are  all  of  uniform  diameter.  To  avoid  trouble  with 
damp  filling  as  much  as  possible  we  advise  that  the  bobbins  be 
filled  with  linseed  oil  and  two  coats  of  shellac  applied  after  they 
are  dried.  Much  trouble  is  found  with  filling  yarn  because  the 
bobbins  do  not  fit  down  properly  on  the  spindles.  We  expect  to 
obviate  this  trouble  entirely  with  our  new  spindle,  but  the  fault 
will  necessarily  continue  in  old  mills.  With  the  old  pattern  of 
spindle  the  bobbins  should  tit  the  sleeve  at  from  one-half  to  five- 
eights  of  an  inch,  entering  the  cup  (if  there  be  one)  at  about 
one-eighth  of  an  inch,  fitting  loose  at  the  upper  bearing, 
which  should  be  at  least  3-4  of  an  inch  in  length.  Cups  are 
really  not  necessary  on  our  tilling  bobbins  as  the  steel  rings 
prevent  splitting. 


>3- 


REAMIXG    BOBBIXS. 

When  the  bobbins  are  reamed  the  reamer  should  be  care- 
fully watched.  Not  over  ^oo  bobbins  should  be  reamed  without 
testing  the  fit.  Trv  the  spindle  in  the  bobbin  and  feel  if  there  is 
play  at  the  upper  bearing.     If  not,  the  reamer  need--  spreading. 

To  spread  and  sharpen  a  reamer,  the  temper  must  be  drawn,  the 
reamer  placed  in  a  vice  and  the  part  that  reams  slightly  spread 
with  a  light  hammer  and  a  tool  made  for  that  purpose.  The 
reamer  must  then  be  tempered.  Any  good  mechanic  can  change 
the  reamer  to  the  proper  -ize.  A  mill  with  10.000  filling  bob- 
bins  should  have  at  least  six  top  reamers  and  two  "pod" 
reamers.  The  upper  bearing  gives  a  great  deal  more  trouble 
than  the  lower  bearing  and  it  is  well  to  have  a  surplus.  Run 
the  reamer  at  least  2.000  revolutions  a  minute. —  2.^00  is  better. 
A  good  man  should  ream  from  7.000  to  10.000  bobbins  a  day. 
Every  mill  should  have  at  least  20  bobbins  to  a  spindle  to  each 
number  of  yarn  used.  To  weave  off  in  the  shuttle  properly  the 
filling  wind  should  be  considered.  We  have  found  main  mills 
where  changes  in  the  traverse  would  give  better  results.  On  36 
yarn  we  find  best  results  with  the  rail  going  down  quick  and 
up  slow  in  the  proportion  of  ij  turns  on  the  up-wind  to  6  turn- 
on  the  down-wind.  This  is  on  a  traverse  of  1  1-2  inches.  With 
coarser  yarn  like  No.  22  we  should  recommend  1  3-4  inches. 


PREVEXTIXG    BUXCHES    IX    CLOTH. 

All  weavers  know  that  when  the  last  cn(\  of  tilling  winds 
off  from  a  bobbin  it  b  liable  to  make  a  bunch  in  the  cloth. 
Careful    investigation    has    determined    that    these    bunches   are 


133 


practically  always   due   to   the    bobbins  which   did  not  start  up 

properly  when  doffing  and  therefore  require  to  be  wound  on  by 
hand  a  tew  turns  in  older  to  piece  up.  These  lew  turns  are  not 
wound  tight  enough  to  wind  off  properly  and  very  possibly  all 
come  off  together,  which  accounts  for  the  fault  noted.  There  is 
a  common  method  of  doffing  which  also  aggravates  this  difficulty, 
when  the  doffers  wind  the  yarn  on  the  bobbins  by  giving  it  a  few- 
twists  around  the  base  instead  of  using  the  socket  doff.  The 
socket  doff  is  certainly  preferable.  In  order  to  avoid  the  trouble 
from  the  bunch  with  the  bobbins  not  starting  properly,  Mr. 
Charles  II.  Arnold  of  Grosvenor  Dale,  Conn.,  designed  a 
method  in  which  the  doffers  are  provided  with  bobbins  having 
sufficient  yarn  spun  on  them  so  that  they  can  be  pieced  up. 
Whenever  an  end  does  not  start  in  doffing,  the  doffer  removes 
the  empty  bobbin  and  replaces  it  with  the  bobbin  already  pro- 
vided with  enough  yarn  to  piece  up.  In  the  weaving  of  hue 
goods  this  change  reduces  the  seconds  at  once  to  a  marked 
degree.  The  extra  bobbins  are  of  course  furnished  by  spinning 
a  slight  amount  of  yarn  on  some  extra  bobbins  at  the  frame  and 
then  removing  them  for  use  as  noted.  It  is,  of  course,  somewhat 
difficult  to  secure  co-operation  between  the  two  departments,  the 
spinner  not  often  willing  to  go  to  extra  work  on  the  weaver's 
account.  It  is  only,  however,  in  this  way  that  good  results  are 
obtained.  Mi".  Arnold's  idea  is  patented,  but  we  allow  its  free 
use  to  all  owners  of  Northrop  Looms. 


'34 


WINDING    BUNCHES   FOR    FEELER 
BOBBINS. 

The  bobbins  used  on  our  feeler  looms  are  preferably  spun 
with  a  preliminary  bunch,  the  object  being  to  reduce  waste  In- 
preventing  the  operation  of  the  feeler  until  all  the  yarn  and  part 
of  the  bunch  have  been  exhausted.  This  bunch  is  wound  about 
2  i-S  inches  from  the  lower  end  of  the  bobbin  and  is  about  3-8 
of  an  inch  in  length.  We  supply  mechanism  especially  designed 
to  govern  the  traverse  of  the  spinning  frames  to  automatically 
wind  this  bunch  and  have  them  in  use  in  many  mills  on  various 
makes  of  frames.  They  are  perfectly  satisfactory  in  every 
instance  where  given  a  little  care  and  oversight.  No  mechanism 
will  run  in  a  cotton  mill  without  being  properly  oiled  ami 
cleaned.  It  is  evident  that  if  a  feeler  loom  is  set  to  work  with  a 
bunch  that  every  bobbin  should  have  a  bunch.  Bobbins,  there- 
fore, which  fail  to  start  up  at  the  doff  should  be  replaced  with 
special  bobbins  provided  in  advance,  already  having  the  bunches 
wound  on  them.  It  is.  of  course,  possible  to  wind  hunches  on 
rilling  frames  without  automatic  mechanism  by  simply  holding 
the  rail  at  the  transfer  point  either  by  hand  or  by  clamp.  This 
method  would,  however,  require  special  attention  by  an  intelli- 
gent hand  at  the  proper  time. 


COP  LOOMS. 


In  weaving  with  cop  filling  more  care  is  necessary  than 
with  bobbins.  Bobbin  filling  rarely  loops  oft.  while  cops  break 
in  two  for  insignificant  reasons.      Our   skewers   are   made   from 


i35 


conventional  patterns  by  an  experienced  builder  and  are  designed 
to   lit   the   sample  cops  which   are   sent   us.     We   have  to  tit  the 

skewers  to  the  cops,  as  it  will  not  do  to  assume  that  all  cops  are 
alike  because  they  are  spun  on  similar  mule  spindles.  Some 
yarn  is  twisted  harder  than  others  and  yarn  is  often  spun  both 
coarse  and  tine  on  the  same  spindle.  Proper  temper  is  very 
important,  as  the  skewer  should  not  only  have  the  proper  shape, 
but  hold  it  and  stay  open.  Many  Hxers  spread  skewers  with  a 
screw-driver  or  other  tool,  hut  this  is  very  liable  to  break  them. 
When  a  mill  uses  steamed  cops  it  should  he  careful  to  send  us 
sample  cops  after  being  steamed.  Trouble  with  cops  splitting  is 
not  necessarily  due  to  improper  shape  of  skewer  or  excessive 
pick  at  the  loom.  It  may  possibly  he  due  to  the  lack  of  proper 
wind  in  the  spinning  room.  Sometimes  cop  skewers  on  our 
looms  get  bent  by  catching  in  the  shuttle.  They  should  he  care- 
fully examined  at  intervals  to  see  that  they  are  perfectly  true. 
During  the  transfer  the  skewer  strikes  into  the  box  with  some- 
thing of  a  blow  and  we  recommend  that  the  cop  tubes  which 
are  removed  from  the  skewers  he  dropped  in  the  box  to  make  a 
cushion. 


WARP  STOP-MOTIONS.      THE  STEEL 
HARNESS. 

With  our  steel  harness  loarp  stop-motion  the  heddles  them- 
selves are  used  as  detectors  to  effect  the  stopping  of  the  loom  it 
a  warp  thread  breaks  or  becomes  too  slack.  Originally  we  only 
applied  the  steel  harness  tor  two-harness  weaving,  hut  are  now 
using  it  for  two.  three,  four  and  five-shade  work  with   great   sue- 


136 


cess.  The  heddles  of  the  steel  harness  are  suspended  by  the 
heddle  bars  which  pass  through  slots  in  the  upper  part  of  the 
heddles,   the  warp  threads  being  drawn  through    the    eyes   near 

the  center.  The  lower  ends  of  the  heddles  are  free  from  the 
moving  frame,  hut  are  guided  by  stationary  devices  which  pre- 
vent their  swaying  too  much  either  forward  or  sideways.  Be- 
tween the  harnesses  is  a  long,  flat  casting  called  the  stop-motion 
girt,  which  serves  two  purposes;  first,  to  separate  the  harnesses 
and  hold  them  in  position,  and  second,  to  resist  the  action  of  the 
feeler  bar  should  a  heddle  drop  down  and  he  caught  between  it 
and  the  girt. 


KNOCK- OFF  MECHANISM. 

Upon  the  harness  earn  shaft  there  is  a  cam  upon  which  a 
follower  works,  which,  through  a  small  connecting  rod,  operates 
the  feeler  bars.  This  cam  follower  is  held  against  the  cam  by 
means  of  a  small  coil  spring.  Between  this  cam,  and  forming 
a  part  of  the  same  casting,  are  two  projections.  Normally, 
these  projections  just  clear  the  knock-off,  which  is  a  small  casting 
fastened  to  the  same  stud  or  shaft  that  holds  the  cam  follower. 
When  the  heddle  drops,  the  feeler  bar  strikes  it.  The  cam  fol- 
lower is  thus  prevented  from  following  the  cam,  and  the  knock- 
off  on  the  shaft  with  the  follower  is  moved  out  of  its  normal 
position  in  such  a  way  as  to  be  struck  by  one  of  the  projections 
beside  the  cam,  thus  moving  the  whole  link  on  which  the  cam 
follower  and  the  knock-off  are  fastened.  This  motion  of  the 
link  is  communicated  to  the  shipper  handle,  throwing  off  the  belt. 
When  a  heddle  does  not  drop,  the  feeler  bars  oscillate  hack  and 
forth,  and  the  knock-off  is  held  out  of  the  way  of  the  projections 
or  lugs  on  the  hub  of  the  oscillator  cam,  and  the  loom  continues 
running:. 


J37 


ADJUSTMENTS. 

In  setting  the  steel  harness  stop-motion  the  first  thing  to  do 
is  to  either  throw  off  the  belt,  or  remove  the  key  which  holds 
the  end  of  the  shipper-lever  in  the  shipper-handle  (in  our  later 
looms),  and  place  the  shipper  handle  in  the  notch  in  the  shipper- 
lock;  this  will  bring  the  stop-motion  into  the  same  position  as 
when  the  loom  is  running.  Then  turn  the  loom  until  the  feeler- 
bars  are  in  their  extreme  forward  position  under  the  girt.  The 
knock-off  link  should  be  against  its  hearing  in  the  hub  of  the 
cam,  and  the  cam-follower  should  bear  against  the  cam  in  its 
lowest  place.  The  small  casting  on  the  same  stud  as  the  cam- 
follower,  called  the  knock-off,  should  be  so  set  that  it  will  just 
clear  the  projections  on  the  hub  of  the  cam  as  the  cam  revolves 
on  the  cam-shaft. 

The  cam  on  this  stop-motion  is  very  similar  to  that  used 
with  the  cotton  harness  stop-motion.  The  position  of  the  oscil- 
lator-cam is  governed  entirely  by  the  harness-cams  and  should 
work  in  conjunction  with  them.  When  this  cam  is  meshed 
with  the  harness-cams,  which  it  does  when  the  harness-cams  are 
on  the  cam  shaft,  it  must,  of  course,  move  with  them  ;  but 
when  the  harness-cams  are  on  the  auxiliary  shaft,  care  must  be 
used  to  run  the  oscillator-cam  in  the  right  position.  In  this  case, 
when  the  harnesses  are  level  or  passing  each  other,  the  oscillator 
cam  should  be  so  set  that  the  long  axis  of  the  cam  is  horizon- 
tally level,  or  in  other  words,  so  that  the  faces  of  the  cam  point 
directly  to  the  front  and  back  of  the  loom  on  a  horizontal  line 
with  the  floor. 

The  cam-follower  is  held  in  position  In  a  spring  on  the  stud 
to  which  it  is  fastened;  it'  it  docs  not  follow  the  cam  as  quickly 
as  it  should,  tighten  this  spring.  Care  should  he  taken,  how- 
ever, not  to  have  too  much  tension  on  this  spring,  hut  just 
enough   to  make  the  cam-follower  work  properly;    otherwise  the 


i3» 

heddle  would  be  bent  by  the  force  of  the  blow.  The  motion  of 
this  cam -follower  is  communicated  to  the  feeler-bar  shaft  by 
means  of  a  connecting  rod.  the  length  of  which  may  be  varied 
at  will  by  turning  to  the  right  or  left. 

On  each  side  of  the  stop-motion  girt,  under  the  warp  and 
just  touching  it.  are  the  front  rod  and  back  rods,  which  hold  the 
heddles  in  place  so  they  will  drop  into  position  to  be  caught  by 
the  feeler-bar  if  a  thread  breaks.  These  rods  also  hold  up  slack 
threads  which  otherwise  might  allow  the  heddles  to  drop  low 
enough  to  stop  the  loom. 

Small  castings  called  heddle-bar  collars  are  placed  on  the 
heddle  bars  to  keep  the  heddles  in  line  with  the  yarn.  There 
are  also  guides  at  each  end  of  the  stop-motion  girt  to  keep  the 
bottom  parts  of  the  heddles  in  line. 

The  harnesses  are  leveled  up  at  the  various  positions  of  the 
crank:  On  underthrow  looms  from  the  bottom  center  to  the 
front  center,  and  on  overthrow  looms  from  the  top  center  to  the 
front  center,  according  to  the  class  of  goods  to  be  woven. 

The  harnesses  are  connected  to  what  are  termed  harness 
rolls  at  the  top  of  the  loom.  Care  should  be  used  to  have  the 
back  harness  connected  to  the  largest  roll,  and  the  front  harness 
to  the  smallest  roll,  in  order  to  work  in  harmony  with  the  har- 
ness cams.  In  some  cases  the  opposite  to  this  has  been  done, 
interfering  with  the  proper  working  of  the  loom. 

The  front  heddle  bars  are  smaller  than  the  back,  and  must 
be  set  in  their  proper  position. 

The  trout  and  back  rods  should  be  set  just  high  enough  to 
touch  the  yarn  when  the  yarn  is  in  its  proper  position  on  the 
race-plate. 

If  the  shade  should  be  too  high  above  the  race-plate  it  can 
be  lowered  by  turning  down  the  set  screws  in  the  castings  at 
each  side  of  the  loom  upon  which  the  harness-roll  rests,  and 
then   tightening  the   connections   between    the    harness-yoke    and 


'39 


treadles  by  raising  the  cap  with  the  spring  on  top  and  turning  it. 

If  the  shade  should  be  too  low.  loosen  the  connection  between 
the  harness-yoke  and  treadles  and  raise  the  harness.  The  shade 
should  just  clear  the  race-plate.  A  great  advantage  with  the 
steel  harness  is.  that  after  the  shade  is  once  set  it  requires  very 
little  or  no  attention,  and  new  warps  can  be  put  in  without  alter- 
ing the  shade,  and  more  quickly  than  with  any  other  harness 
made.  In  putting  in  a  warp,  however,  it  is  possible  to  get  it 
tangled  up;  but  this  can  be  avoided  by  a  little  care  and  common 
sense  on  the  part  of  the  operative.  After  the  warp  is  once 
placed  in  the  loom  there  is  no  danger  of  tangling. 

The  bottom  connection  of  the  front  harness  should  be 
placed  in  the  second  notch  in  the  treadle  and  the  back  one  in 
the  fourth  notch. 

The  heddle-bars  must  be  straight.  If  the  heddles  bind  in 
any  way  on  the  heddle-bar  it  will  show  reedy  cloth,  and  also  be 
a  serious  strain  on  the  yarn.  No  oil  should  be  put  on  the  hed- 
dles or  heddle  bars. 

It  sometimes  becomes  necessary  to  apply  a  heddle  to  a 
harness  bar  after  the  warp  has  been  drawn  in.  and  this  is  usually 
done  by  breaking  open  the  eve  and  slipping  it  on.  While  this 
is  all  right  as  a  temporary  expedient,  it  is  well  to  go  over  the 
harnesses  in  the  drawing-in  room  before  re-drawing,  and  remove 
such  heddles,  as  they  are  liable  to  catch  and  interfere,  preventing 
the  action  of  the  warp  stop-motion. 

One  of  the  most  annoying  troubles  formerly  experienced 
with  our  steel  harness  looms  was  their  liability  to  become  mag- 
netized, thereby  sticking  together  and  making  poor  sheds. 
Some  slight  changes  in  construction  have  seemed  to  overcome 
this  difficulty,  as  we  hear  very  little  Erom  it.  except  on  some  of 
our  earlier  looms.  It  is  perfectly  easy  to  remove  this  magnetiza- 
tion by  holding  the  heddles  in  an  electrical  coil,  and  we  have 
demagnetized  several  lots  for  our  customers. 


140 


Sometimes  the  lower  ends  of  the  heddles  are  seriously  bent 

or  twisted  by  the  action  of  the  vibrator.  This  is  either  due  to 
poor  adjustment,  which  brings  a  too  severe  strain,  or  is  some- 
times caused  by  improper  setting  of  the  knock-off  so  that  a 
dropped  heddle  receives  several  hundred  or  thousand  blows,  as 
the  loom  does  not  stop.  The  same  trouble  naturally  occurs  with 
detector  wires  as  well. 

Like  every  other  mechanism  that  contacts  with  a  cotton 
thread,  the  heddle  is  smoothed  by  use  in  a  way  which  no  previ- 
ous mechanical  method  can  attempt  to  duplicate.  Our  steel 
heddles  will  therefore  work  much  better  after  a  few  weeks'  use, 
and  cause  much  less  warp  breakage  than  when  on  their  first 
warp.  We  polish  the  eyes  in  the  best  manner  known — in  fact 
we  use  especially  invented  processes ;  but  the  rubbing  contact  of 
the  cotton  thread  gives  the  final  finish  to  the  surface.  It  is 
impossible  for  this  wear  to  ever  make  a  sharp  edge,  as  the  thread 
turns  its  corner  in  such  a  way  as  to  continually  round  the  edge. 

So  far  as  our  experience  goes  we  see  no  reason  why  steel 
heddles  should  not  last  indefinitely.  We  have  had  sets  running 
at  least  eight  years  that  are  better  than  when  made.  Of  course 
they  may  get  bent  or  damaged  by  carelessness,  but  there  is  noth- 
ing in  the  normal  operation  to  injure  them. 

In  our  great  variety  of  experiments  with  various  designs  of 
steel  harnesses,  we  have  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that  in  order 
to  secure  the  best  results  the  heddles  must  be  left  with  absolute 
freedom  to  adjust  themselves  to  conditions.  Every  experiment 
designed  to  limit  the  position  of  the  heddle  in  any  way,  for  any 
purpose,  has  always  resulted  in  excess  of  warp  breakage.  With 
certain  weaves  it  has  been  noticed  that  the  heddles  will  not  act 
uniformly,  the  strain  of  the  shed  causing  them  to  sway  or  bend 
to  excess.  Where  this  becomes  serious  we  have  found  it  advisa- 
ble to  use  separators,  which  keep  the  heddles  from  swaying. 


I4I 


COTTON  HARNESS  STOP-MOTION, 
ROPER   TYPE. 

With  this  attachment,  the  ordinary  twine  or  cotton  harness  is 
used,  the  stop-motion  being  applied  between  the  harnesses  and 
the  lease  rods,  two  or  more  threads  being  drawn  through  each  drop 
wire.     The  threads  in  this  stop-motion pass  through  long  slots  in 

the  wires  instead  of  round  eyes,  there  being  two  such  slots, — one 
for  the  passage  of  the  threads,  and  the  other  for  the  passage  of 
the  drop  wire  bar.  We  sometimes  use  a  separate  free  bar  or 
weight  passed  through  the  lower  slot  and  resting  on  the  detectors  to 
keep  them  vertical  in  action.  The  feeler  bar  girt,  knock-off,  etc., 
are  similar  to  those  already  described.  We  also  use  a  back  rod  ox 
warp  support,  as  with  the  steel  harness.  The  stop- motion  girtcanbe 
raised  or  lowered  and  should  be  set  in  position  for  the  feeler  bar 
to  clear  the  drop  w  ires  when  the  shade  is  wide  open  and  no  warp 
threads  broken.  It  should  also  lie  set  high  enough  so  that  when 
the  shade  is  wide  open  it  will  not  pull  the  drop  wires  up  to  their 
full  limit  on  the  drop  wire  bar.  This  can  also  be  adjusted  back- 
ward or  forward  so  as  to  give  room  for  additional  harnesses. 
The  feeler  bar,  which  is  the  piece  of  sheet  steel  bent  at  right 
angles  with  teeth  in  the  edge,  should  be  set  so  that  when  it  lias 
reached  the  end  of  its  forward  movement,  it  will  pass  under  the 
girt  close  to  it.  While  this  form  of  stop-motion  will  apply  for 
many  forms  of  three,  four  and  five  harness  weaves,  there  are 
special  classes  of  shading  to  which  it  will  not  apply.  We  have 
therefore  introduced  the  third  form,  the  single  thread  stop- 
motion,  which  can  be  used  with  any  style  of  weaving,  including 
dobbies  and  jacquards. 


I42 


SINGLE    THREAD    STOP-MOTION. 

With  this  construction,  there  is  one  detector  for  each  thread. 
We  apply  it  in  several  ways,  our  more  common  method  in  the 
past  being  to  arrange  the  detectors  in  two  banks,  and  use  them 
also  to  do  all  leasing  instead  of  the  ordinary  lease  nuts.  We  can 
make  it  in  three  banks  if  necessary.  When  used  in  two  banks, 
there  are  front  and  bark  box  plates  instead  of  the  center  girt.  The 
feeler  bar  is  different  in  being  a  flat  piece  of  steel  with  notched 
edges,  oscillating  between  the  two  banks.  To  prevent  detectors 
from  slipping  or  bending  under  the  twisting  strain,  we  place 
serrated  pieces  of  steel  on  the  bottoms  of  the  box  plates.  The  top 
edges  of  the  box  plates  serve  as  warp  supports.  The  feeler  bar 
having  double  action  needs  two  knock-offs  and  two  connecting  rods 
between  the  cam  and  the  follower  shaft. 


ADJUSTMENT. 

In  setting  this  stop-motion,  throw  off  belt  or  remove  key  as 
before,  placing  the  shipper  handle  in  its  notch  in  the  shipper 
lock.  Set  the  knock-off  link,  (the  long  casting  forming  connec- 
tion to  the  shipper  handle.)  against  its  bearing  cm  the  cam  hub  so 
as  to  have  no  back  lash.  Then  place  the  feeler  bar  in  the  center 
between  the  box  plates  and  adjust  the  two  small  castings  on  the 
feeler  bar  shaft  which  we  call  the  tight  and  loose  oscillator  fingers. 
These  should  project  or  hang  evenly  on  each  side  of  the  shaft. 
Now  loosen  the  set  screw  which  holds  the  stop-motion  cam  on  the 
cam  shaft  so  as  to  be  able  to  revolve  the  stop-motion  cam  by  hand 
and  set  the  tight  knock-off,  the  small  casting  fastened  to  the  stud 
in  the  knock-off  link  by  a  set  screw,  so  that  it  will  clear  the  point 


H3 

of  the  cam  hub  i - 1 6  to  i-S  of  an  inch.  Turn  the  cam  by  hand 
until  the  cam  follower  rests  on  the  lowest  point  of  the  cam  and 
the  feeler  bar  is  near  the  hack  box  plate.  Then  connect  the  loose 
oscillator  finger  that  is  on  the  feeler  bar  shaft  with  the  cam  follower 
by  means  of  the  connecting  rod,  and  adjust  the  rod  so  that  as  the 
cam  revolves  the  feeler  bar  will  he  moved  from  side  to  side 
equallv.  When  this  has  been  done,  connect  the  tight  oscillator 
finger  that  is  on  the  feeler  bar  shaft  with  the  loose  knock-off  by 
means  of  the  connecting  rod  and  adjust  the  rod  so  that  the  knock- 
off  will  clear  the  point  of  the  cam  huh  as  the  cam  revolves.  If, 
when  these  connections  and  adjustments  are  made,  the  feeler  bar 
should  not  move  an  equal  distance  each  side  of  the  shaft,  the 
trouble  may  he  overcome  by  further  adjusting  the  connecting 
rods.  The  spring  on  the  stud  which  carries  the  knock-off  and  cam 
follower  should  he  set  just-  tight  enough  so  that  the  cam  follower 
will  follow  the  cam  properly.  The  tension  of  the  spring  on  the 
loose  oscillator  finger  on  the  feeler  bar  shaft  should  be  so  regu- 
lated  that  it  will  hold  the  two  fingers  together  on  the  shaft. 


RELEASE  MOTION. 

With  all  of  our  warp  stop-motions  except  the  steel  harness. 
trouble  was  formerly  experienced  on  account  of  the  feeler  bars 
grasping  and  holding  the  detector  after  the  loom  had  been 
stopped  by  a  broken  end.  In  such  a  case  the  viu\  was  drawn  in 
without  raising  the  detector,  so  that  the  loom  was  stopped  a  sec- 
ond time,  or  else  the  weaver  was  compelled  to  find  the  detector 
and  release  it  from  the  grasp  of  the  feeler  bar  by  hand. 


i44 


We  now  apply  with  our  cotton  harness  warp  stop-motions, 
devices  which  automatically  release  a  dropped  detector  upon 
stoppage  of  the  loom.  This  feature  involves  almost  no  addi- 
tional parts,  is  positive  in  action,  and  saves  considerable  time 
for  the  weaver.  It  is  exclusive  with  us.  and  fullv  covered  by 
patent. 


SLACK    THREADS. 

Slack  threads  often  cause  trouble  by  letting  warp  detectors  of 
any  pattern  drop  low  enough  to  engage  the  vibrator  and  stop  the 
loom,  causing  annoyance  to  the  weaver,  who  may  hunt  a  long 
time  for  the  supposedly  broken  thread.  Sometimes  the  trouble 
is  due  to  the  whole  warp  being  woven  too  slack  by  improper 
tension  of  the  let-off.  but  the  greater  difficulty  is  from  individual 
threads.  A\  e  have  tried  to  arrange  sufficient  leeway  to  overcome 
this  trouble,  but  if  it  is  found  serious,  the  mill  should  give  more 
attention  to  its  warping  and  slashing.  .Sometimes  the  relative 
position  of  the  girt  with  relation  to  the  whip-roll  is  the  source  of 
the  trouble.  On  some  peculiar  fancy  weaves  where  many  har- 
nesses are  employed,  several  of  the  threads  will  remain  neces- 
sarily slack  all  the  time.  If  there  are  hut  a  few  of  these  threads 
it  is  easy  to  obviate  the  trouble  by  letting  them  run  without 
detectors,  as  they  are  not  liable  to  break  in  any  event  on  account 
of  their  slackness.  It  there  i-  a  great  number  of  loose  threads  in 
the  pattern,  it  may  be  advisable  to  run  them  on  a  separate  warp 
beam . 


■45 


WARP   BREAKAGE. 

Ever  since  our  first  experiments  with  Northrop  Looms,  we 
have  continuously  run  large  numbers  of  them   in  our  own  shops 
with  careful  supervision  and  inspection  of  product,  and  we  feel 
that  we  have  had  more  actual  tests  made  of  various  weaving  con- 
ditions than   have  been   collected  by  all  other   experimenters  on 
looms    in    all    time.      Some    of    the    results  are  curious,  showing 
how  impossible  it  is  to  draw  definite  conclusions  from  machinery 
that  employs  so  variable  a  material  as  cotton  fibre.      We  keep  an 
actual  record  of  warp  breakage  and  hud  that  it  varies  in  different 
years   from  as   high  as  24  warp  breaks  per  loom  per  cut   in  one 
year  down  to  an  average  of  12   in  another,  with  no  perceptible 
change  in  conditions  other  than   the  quality  of  the  cotton  used   in 
making  the  yarn.      All  know  that  the   fibre  of   different  crops   is 
not  similar.      Under  the  ordinary  conditions  we  expect   that  the 
breakage  on  print  warp  with  either  steel  or  cotton  harness  should 
average  between   10  and  15  breaks  per  cut.     If  warp  breakage 
were  to  he  reduced  without  attention  being  paid  to  other  factors, 
looms  would   he  quite   differently  designed.      In  order  to  produce 
cover  on  the  cloth  the  yarn  is  strained  harder  in  the  lower  shade 
and   shedding  cams  are  given  a  jerky  motion  in  order  to   keep  the 
shades  open  for  the  shuttle   to  pass  properly.      Our   steel    harness 
will  break  more  ends   for  the  first  few  weeks  while  the  yarn  is 
giving  a  final  polish  to  the  eyes.     Bad  reeds  are  liable  to  cause 
trouble,  in  fact  man}  mills  appear  to  buy  their  reeds  without  any 
consideration  of  quality  whatever. 


146 


KNOTS. 

It  was  figured  some  years  ago  that  two-thirds  of  the  warp 
breakage  on  a  loom  came  from  the  knots  made  in  piecing  the 
yarn  together,  as  these  knots  would  fray  adjoining  threads  or  be 
caught  in  the  reeds  or  between  the  heddles.  The  number  of  knots 
is  reduced  by  spooling  from  large  warp  bobbins,  and  by  making 
good  yarn  which  will  have  few  piecings  to  cause  breakage  at  the 
spooler  or  warper.  A  certain  number  of  knots  is  unavoidable, 
but  the  way  the  knot  is  tied  affects  the  situation  materially,  in 
the  old  hand  method  the  operative  at  the  spooler  tied  a  knot  with 
long  ends,  so  that  for  some  time  we  advised  the  tying  of  a 
weaver's  knot  at  the  spooler,  which  would  not  only  have  short 
ends,  but  be  less  objectionable  in  size.  We  believe  that  in 
Europe  spooler  tenders  are  forced  to  tie  a  weaver's  knot,  and  some 
mills  who  adopted  the  practice  here  found  no  trouble  after  getting 
the  help  trained,  the  girls  spooling  as  great  a  product  as  before. 
.Since  the  introduction  of  the  automatic  knot  Ivor,  however, 
spooler  knots  as  tied  by  machinery  become  much  less  objection- 
able as  the  machine  leaves  short  ends  and  apparently  ties  the 
knot  hard  and  compact.  The  automatic  knot-tyer  has  gone  into 
such  extensive  use  that  our  recommendation  is  practically 
superfluous. 


HARNESS    CAMS. 

It  is  absolutely  necessary  for  good  shedding  to  have  the 
treadle  rolls  in  continuous  contact  with  the  cams.  If  there  is  too 
much  angle  on  the  cam  point  there  naturally  will  be  more  ten- 
dency to  throw.      Harness  cams  should  lie  set  to  start  opening 


M7 


the  shades  with  the  lay  at  the  bottom  center  oi.  the  crank.  It"  tight 
selvages  are  desired  the  cams  may  be  delayed  a  little,  or  conversely, 
for  loose  selvages,  the  lay  may  be  pushed  back  a  little.  This 
applies  to  looms  running  in  the  usual  American  manner,  known 
as  the  under-throw.  With  over-throw  looms,  of  course,  the  setting 
would  be  directly  opposite.  We  built  several  orders  of  oxer- 
throw  looms  for  certain  of  our  customers  at  one  time,  but  found 
that  they  had  no  appreciable  advantages  which  could  not  be 
secured  as  well  by  simple  changes  in  design  on  the  under-throw 
principle.  As  to  shape  of  harness  cams  we  decided  after  exten- 
sive tests  to  use  a  6o°  rest  cam  with  all  widths  of  loom  up  to  and 
including  40  inch.  If  read  with  relation  to  the  upper  shaft, 
these  cams  would  be  known  as  1  20°  rest  cams.  On  wider  looms 
the  rest  is  made  longer  until  on  ioS-inch  looms  we  put  on  iSc° 
rest  cams.  There  is  no  definite  fixed  rule  about  the  shape  of  the 
cam.  Different  weavers  have  different  ideas  as  to  the  amount  of 
rest  and  the  amount  of  shade  opening.  We  try  to  satisfy  our 
customers  according  to  the  goods  woven  and  the  width  of  loom 
weaving  them.  In  many  cases  the  proper  cam  can  only  be 
determined  after  experiment. 


SELVAGE. 

Selvage  threads  are  usually  looser  than  the  others,  often  caus- 
ing the  edge  of  the  cloth  to  crinkle  or  be  longer  than  the  center. 
This  is  due  to  carelessness  in  setting  the  temples.  If  the  temple 
is  too  far  back,  the  yarn  will  dra:o  around  it  and  stretch  the 
thread,  as  the  width  of  the  cloth  in  the  reed  i-  greater  than  in 
the  woven  piece.  If  the  temple  roll  is  not  free  or  runs  hard  for 
any  cause,  it  will   stretch   the   threads   in  the  same  way.      Abo  it 


I4S 


the  yarn  is  not  put  <>n  the  yarn  beam  properly;  that  is.  if  it  is 
■filled  higher  at  the  ends  than  in  the  center,  the  yarn  will  be 
stretched.  Where  double  threads  are  used  for  the  selvage  and 
pass  through  one  harness  eye,  they  cannot  control  the  warp  stop- 
motion  unless  both  of  them  should  break  at  once.  Many  mills 
use  twisted  selvage  threads,  which,  of  course,  overcome  this 
trouble.  As  there  is  more  strain  on  the  selvage  threads  the 
twisted  threads  would  seem  to  have  an  advantage  also  in  lessen- 
ing warp  breakage. 


CARE    OF    TEMPLES    AND     TEMPLE 
THREAD    CUTTERS. 

To  insure  proper  care  of  temples,  system  is  necessary  and 
we  strongly  recommend  the  practice  of  all  up-to-date  mills  who 
have  the  loom  fixers  take  out  the  temple  rolls  and  thoroughly  clean 
them  and  slightly  oil  the  pins  that  hold  the  roll  in  place  every  time 
a  warp  is  run  out  before  a  new  one  is  allowed  to  be  started.  The 
fixer  should  also  examine  the  temple  thread  cutter  at  the  same 
time.  With  this  amount  of  care  the  usual  troubles  will  be 
entirely  eliminated.  The  temple  thread  cutter  is  only  supposed 
to  cut  the  thread  leading  from  the  hopper  stud  to  the  cloth  when 
the  filling  is  changed.  A  loose  thread  at  the  selvage  left  by  the 
filling  running  out  will  not  necessarily  be  cut  by  the  thread 
cutter,  so  that  the  presence  of  such  threads  does  not  indicate  that 
the  thread  cutter  is  not  working.  These  loose  threads  are  com- 
mon on  all  looms.  In  setting  temples,  place  the  lay  fully 
forward  and  adjust  the  temple  head  to  be  about  1-16  of  an  inch 
from    the    reed.      The    thread   cutter   knife    can     be    removed    by 


i49 


detaching  the  spring  on  the  cutter  arm  and  pulling  the  cutter  out, 
at  the  same  time  raising  the  front  of  it  as  high  as  possible.  It 
can  be  replaced  without  difficulty.  A  strip  of  leather  should  be 
placed  on  the  lay  opposite  the  temple  heel  and  cutter  arm  to 
strike  them  when  the  lay  comes  forward.  The  strip  at  the 
thread  cutter  side  should  he  long  enough  to  strike  both  the 
temple  heel  and  the  cutter  arm. 


FEELER  FILLING   CHANGER. 

The/eeler  motion  is  placed  on  the  left  hand  side  of  the  loom 
when  the  hopper  is  on  the  right  hand  side.  It  is  set  to  pass 
through  slots  in  the  front  box  plate  and  shuttle,  coming  in  contact 
with  the  yarn  on  the  bobbin  or  cop  as  the  lay  beats  forward. 
When  the  filling  in  the  shuttle  has  been  nearly  woven  off  so  that 
it  will  no  longer  move  the  feeler,  the  filling-changing  mechanism 
or  /><rtt,-rr  operates,  supplying  a  fresh  bobbin  or  cop  to  the  shuttle 
when  it  is  thrown  to  the  other  side  of  the  loom.  In  case  the 
filling  breaks  before  it  has  been  woven  off  sufficiently  to 
operate  the  feeler,  the  loom  will  stop,  thus  enabling  the 
weaver  to  find  and  match  the  pick  by  hand,  as  in  common 
loom  weaving.  The  mechanism  can  be  set.  however,  so 
that  it  will  supply  fresh  tilling  at  such  times.  This  makes 
infrequent  faults  and  on  some  goods  where  it  would  not 
do  to  have  mispicks  every  time  the  filling  changed,  it  might  do 
no  harm  to  have  a  mispick  at  long  intervals  between  breakages 
in  the  filling.  To  set  the  feeler,  place  an  empty  bobbin  or  cop 
skewer  in  the  shuttle  and  bring  the  lay  to  its  extreme  forward 
position.  Turn  the  adjusting  screw  in  the  feeler  until  its  end  i^ 
about    the    thickness    of  a    lavcr    of    yarn    from    the    bobbin    or 


i=;o 


skewer.     Then  take  several  bobbin-  or  skewers  having  a  small 

quantity  of  yarn  on  them,  place  one  in  the  shuttle,  and  start  the 
loom.  If  it  is  thrown  out  before  enough  filling  is  woven  off,  set 
the  feeler  nearer.  If  the  filling  runs  out  entirely  before  the  bob- 
bin or  skewer  is  thrown  out,  the  feeler  adjustment  should  be 
moved  back.  Several  trials  may  be  necessary  before  the  feeler 
is  set  properly.  The  coil  spring  around  the  shank  of  the  feeler 
regulates  the  pressure  on  the  filling  in  the  shuttle.  The  tension 
on  this  spring  should  be  as  light  as  is  consistent  with  proper 
action.  If  too  strong,  it  will  push  the  bobbin  out  of  line.  From 
time  to  time  the  weaver  should  examine  the  front  of  the  feeler 
arm  which  enters  the  shuttle  and  contacts  with  the  filling.  If 
rough,  it  should  be  rubbed  with  a  little  emery  cloth  or  it  may 
wear  the  filling  and  break  it.  While  our  present  feelers  are  set 
to  run  independent  of  back  lash,  and  looseness  in  the  lav  pitmen, 
it  is  well,  of  course,  to  have  lost  motion  taken  up.  Extra  pains 
should  be  taken  to  see  that  the  shuttle  boxes  are  properly  -et  at 
the  feeler  end  or  the  feeler  may  strike  the  shuttle  itself  instead  of 
passing  through  the  slot. 


FEELER    THREAD    CUTTER. 

The  thread  cutter  used  a-  an  auxiliary  on  our  feeler  looms  is 
attached  to  the  casting  called  the  shuttle  position  detector,  which  is 
moved  up  to  the  lay  whenever  a  change  of  filling  is  called  for. 
If  the  shuttle  is  boxed  properly  so  that  the  detector  does  not  con- 
tact with  the  tip.  the  thread  cutter  will  cut  the  filling  which 
extends  from  the  cloth  to  the  bobbin,  the  full  supply  not  being 
woven  fully  off.  A  clamping  device  holds  the  end  extending  from 
the  cloth  to  the  cutter  in  position  so  that  the  regular  temple  thread 


'5* 


cutter  will  cut  it  again  close  to  the  cloth.  The  thread  is  thus  cut 
in  two  places  ;  first,  as  close  to  the  shuttle  as  possible,  SO  that 
the  bobbin  when  expelled  can  easily  drag  it  out;  and  next, 
it  is  cut  close  to  the  selvage.  In  setting  the  cutter,  take 
pains  to  see  that  the  jaws  will  engage  the  thread  properly. 
Heavy  filling  may  require  a  slightly  different  setting  than  light  fill- 
ing. To  raise  or  lower  the  device,  change  the  position  of  the 
stand  on  the  loom  side  to  which  the  whole  device  is  fastened.  It 
seems  almost  useless  to  explain  that  the  feeler  requires  special 
bobbins  with  cylindrical  contour,  hut  parties  have  actually  tried 
to  run  the  feeler  with  regular  bobbins  at  times.  With  our  earlier 
forms  of  feeler  any  change  in  position  of  the  front  box  plate 
required  readjustment  of  the  feeler  itself.  This  is  not  necessary 
with  the  two  styles  illustrated  in  this  hook. 


LET-OFF. 

Let-off  motions  may  he  divided  into  two  general  classes. 
tension  and  friction.  Tension  devices  are  intended  to  let  off  a 
definite  amount  of  warp  at  each  stroke  of  the  lay.  It  is  evident 
that  as  the  warp  beam  runs  out,  it  is  necessary  to  turn  it  in  pro- 
portion to  the  reduction  in  diameter,  as  there  must  he  more 
movement  when  Hearing  the  empty  heam.  With  the  Bar  tie  tt 
let-off.  it  is  usually  necessary  to  regulate  the  tension  by  adjust- 
ment of  the  collar  on  the  trombone  as  the  heam  weaves  off.  s()  that 
enough  teeth  of  the  ratchet  \\\\\  he  taken  up  each  time.  Gener- 
ally speaking,  the  warp  heam  should  turn  about  three  times  as  fast 
when  empt\  as  when  full,  and  surely  move  at  least  one  iootli  ot 
the  rachet  at  each  motion  of  the  lay.  Improper  delivery  of  yarn 
will   cause   uneven  strain   of   the   cloth,  making    it  vary    in    width 


K2 


and  also  increase  warp  breakage.  Sufficient  friction  should  be 
put  on  the  let-off  wheel  to  prevent  it  from  running  by  the  point 
where  the  pawl  leaves  it.  The  let-off  motions  that  we  now  use 
are  the  Bartlett,  friction  with  rope  chain  or  leatheroids,  and  our 
latest  mechanism  called  the  Draper-Roper  self-adjusting  lot-off. 
The  Bartlett  and  friction  are  standard  devices  needing  no  special 
description  here.  The  self-adjusting  let-off  is  what  its  name 
implies,  that  is.  when  the  tension  is  once  set.  there  should  be  no 
nvt-(\  of  adjusting  it  at  any  time  for  the  class  of  goods  being 
woven.  If  the  goods  are  changed  the  tension  can  be  changed  to 
accommodate  the  new  conditions.  This  let-off  will  keep  the 
cloth  at  more  uniform  width  than  any  other,  because  the  tension 
is  also  uniform.  Xo  special  reference  to  detail  is  necessary  as 
the  adjustments  are  similar  to  the  Bartlett. 


WARP  BEAMS. 

There  is.  of  course,  an  advantage  in  putting  as  much  yarn 
as  possible  on  the  beam,  and  our  new  let-off  will  allow  large 
beams  with  little  trouble,  as  the  tension  can  be  regulated  to  the 
greater  difference  in  diameters.  The  larger  the  beam  the  more 
the  trouble  with  crossed  threads.  We  soon  changed  from  16  to 
1 8-inch  beams,  and  furnish  20-inch  beams  for  coarse  yam.  At 
the  present  time  we  do  not  recommend  larger  than  18-inch  for 
fine  numbers. 


'53 


TAKE-  UP. 

The  take-up  motion  in   use  on  all  present  styles  <>!'   Northrop 

L ns  is  what  we  call  the  hjgh   roll.      As   the   name   implies,  the 

take-up  roll  is  placed  high  up.  next  to  and  inside  the  breast 
beam.  This  roll  has  a  gearwheel  at  one  end  meshing  with  an 
intermediate  gear  which  in  turn  meshes  with  the  change  gear,  the 
change  gear  being  driven  bv  the  ratchet  take-up  wheel,  located 
about  half  way  between  the  front  girt  and  breast  beam.  The 
ratchet  wheel  is  operated  by  the  take-up  pawl  which  is  attached 
to  the  lay  sword,  and  as  the  lav  swings  back,  takes  up  one  tooth 
at  every  pick.  This  description  refers  to  the  E  Model  looms. 
The  J  Model  take-up  is  quite  different.  The  ratchet  wheel  is 
prevented  from  letting  hack  by  the  hold-back  pawl  fastened  to  the 
cloth  roll  stand.  Inside  of  the  hold-hack  pawl  and  on  the  same 
stud  is  the  let-back  pawl.  When  the  tilling  breaks  the  hold-hack 
pawl  is  lifted,  allowing  the  let-hack  pawl  to  let  hack  the  ratchet 
wheel  from  one  to  three  teeth,  as  the  quality  of  the  cloth  may 
require,  thus  avoiding  cracks  or  thin  places.  The  change  gear  is 
composed  of  two  gears  in  one  casting,  one  of  which  meshes  into 
an  intermediate  gear  and  the  other  into  the  gear  on  the  huh  ot 
the  ratchet  wheel.  This  gear  is  held  in  place  on  a  swinging  or 
half  circle  stand.  Each  tooth  on  the  large  end  of  the  change  gear 
usually  represents  two  picks:  for  instance,  for  64  picks  use  a  32- 
tooth  change  gear,  and  a  50  gear  for  100  picks.  After  leaving 
the  take-up  roll,  the  cloth  is  wound  on  a  smooth  iron  roll  called 
the  cloth  roll,  held  in  place  against  the  take-up  roll  by  the  cloth 
roll  racks.  The  cloth  roll  as  we  now  make  it  has  teeth  cut  in  the 
ends  to  he  turned  by  gears  on  the  take-up  roll  shaft,  so  that  the 
cloth  roll  will  get  a  positive  rotation  while  starting  to  wind  the 
cloth.  As  soon  as  a  little  cloth  is  wound,  these  teeth  will  not 
mesh  and  the  rest  of   the   cloth  will   he  wound   by  friction   alone. 


*54 


The  cloth  roll  racks  have  teeth  meshing  into  gears  at  each  end  of 
the  spring  shaft.  The  spring  is  wound  up  by  a  year  and  worm 
wheel 'and  handle  attached  to  the  front  girt.  When  not  in  use.  the 
handle  can  he  put  in  the  notch  provided  for  it  and  be  out  of  the 
way  of  the  operative.  Cloth  can  he  removed  from  the  roll  at 
any  time,  the  weaver  taking  off  cuts  when  convenient.  As  the 
take-up  roll  is  made  of  metal,  it  will  not  change  on  account  of 
the  weather  like  a  wooden  one.  The  fillet  is  fastened  to  wooden 
blocks  inserted  into  holes  in  the  metal  roll.  The  take-up  roll  is 
adjustable  vertically  and  can  he  raised  or  lowered  to  adjust  the 
level  of  the  cloth  on  the  lay  and  give  cover.  Our  new  pattern 
of  take-up  lets  the  cloth  run  over  several  stationary  rolls before 
giving  any  contact  with  the  take-up  roll,  so  as  to  give  more 
Stretch  to  the  cloth  between  the  take-up  roll  and  the  lav.  which 
is  desirable  on  certain  classes  of  goods.  With  the  new  form  of 
take-up  the  cloth  can  he  run  direct  to  the  roll  if  desired. 
The  strength  of  the  coil  spring  on  the  spring  shaft  may  be 
varied  by  turning  the  collar  to  which  it  is  fastened.  When 
the  take-up  roll  is  empty  and  the  cloth  roll  is  forced  up 
against  it.  the  worm  on  the  spring  shaft  should  be  in  such 
a  position  that  the  handle  by  which  it  is  turned  should  just 
slide  off  and'drop  into  its  notch.  The  loose  pawl  inside  the  hold- 
back pawl  has  three  small  holes  through  it  in  which  to  place  an 
extra  pin.  Each  of  these  hole-  represents  one  tooth  on  the  ratchet 
wheel,  that  is.  if  the  extra  pin  is  in  the  first  hole  when  the  loom 
stops  the  ratchet  will  let  back  one  tooth.  If  in  the  second  hole, 
two  teeth.  In  the  third  hole,  three  teeth,  according  to  the 
demands  of  the  cloth.  When  setting  the  let  back  pawl,  turn 
the  loom  over  until  the  filling  cam  follower  or  weft  hammer  i-  in  its 
position  nearest  the  breast  beam.  Pull  the  filling  fork  up  over  the 
hook  on  this  cam  follower  and  now  the  change  mechanism  will 
lie  in  operative  position.  There  is  a  finger  fastened  to  the  starting 
rodhv  a  set  screw  which   should  be  turned  until    it  extends    under 


*55 


the  small  arm  on  the  take-up  pawl  and  just  lifts  it  out  of  its 
engagement  with  the  ratchet  ox  pick  wheel.  This  is  to  accomplish 
the  letting  back  of  the  take-up  at  the  time  transfer  takes  place. 
This  should  be  looked  after  from  time  to  time  with  great  care. 
to  see  that  the  pawl  is  actually  thrown  out  of  engagement  every 
time  there  is  a  transfer,  allowing  the  ratchet  wheel  to  slip  around 
to  the  extent  determined  by  the  pin  in  the  loo>e  pawl  inside  the 
hold-hack  pawl.      Otherwise  thin  places  will   certainly  he  caused. 


FILLING    FORK. 

A  filling  fork  can   act  improperly  by    rebounding  so   as  to 

avoid  catching  on  the  hook  of  the  cam  follower.  Our  own  fork  is 
designed  to  balance  properly:  in  fact,  we  think  it  the  best 
balanced  fork  in  use.  A  fork  can  also  operate  improperly  by 
being  raised  by  a  dragging  filling  thread,  after  the  rilling  in  the 
shuttle  is  exausted.  If  the  shuttle  drags  the  thread  end  into  the 
left  hand  box,  unless  the  filling  is  rather  coarse,  it  probably  will  not 
have  strength  enough  to  raise  the  fork.  Our  double  fork,  however, 
will  protect  against  any  such  trouble  by  detecting  from  the  other 
end  of  the  loom  if   one  fork  be  operating  improperly. 

If  a  fork  is  very  light  in  action,  it  may  be  lifted  by  lint 
collecting  in  front  of  the  grid.  The  more  common  trouble, 
however,  is  due  to  the  lay  shifting  position,  so  that  the  fork  tines 
w  ill  strike  the  grid  and  thus  be  improperly  raised  when  the  Idl- 
ing is  absent.  Of  course,  any  false  operation  of  the  filling  fork 
when  used  singly  will  cause  thin  places  when  the  Idling  runs  out. 
as  no  change  of  filling  will  be  called  for  s, ,  long  as  the  fork 
continues  to  litt. 


156 


Our  double  fork  gives  a  double  chance  against  faulty  opera- 
tion :  but  even  with  the  double  fork  a  shifting  lav  may  operate 
both  improperly.  We  therefore  designed  some  of  our  early  fork 
stands  to  be  guided  by  the  lay  so  that  if  the  loom  shifted,  the 
stands  would  shift  also.  More  recentlv,  however,  we  have 
adopted  a  lay  guide  attached  to  the  loom  frame  and  sliding  in 
another  casting  bolted  to  the  lav.  so  that  the  side  position  of  the 
lav  must  always  be  constant. 

Filling  forks  are  made  in  two  general  stvles,  one  with  soft 
metal  tines,  so  that  the  fixer  can  bend  them  into  any  shape  desired  ; 
the  other  made  of  tempered  metal,  so  they  cannot  be  bent.  We 
prefer  to  make  our  forks  right  at  the  start,  using  tempered  wire, 
so  that  they  cannot  be  bent.  In  our  present  construction,  the 
tines  are  cast  into  place  and  their  position  is  absolutely  fixed  and 
unchangeable.  Our  present  forks  are  all  made  with  three  tines, 
although  we  have  furnished  four  tine  forks  for  special  light  goods. 


LOOM  LAY. 

A  stiff,  heavy  lay  is  absolutely  necessary  to  weave  heavy 
goods,  although  if  the  stiffness  could  be  had  without  the  weight. 
it  would  probably  accomplish  the  same  purpose.  The  hand  rail 
must,  of  necessitv.  be  stiff  in  proportion. 

Much  trouble  is  experienced  with  lays  if  the  wood  i>  not 
properly  seasoned  before  use.  We  find  it  advisable  to  rough 
out  our  lays  and  let  them  season  some  time  before  finishing. 
\\  e  carry  a  large  stock  of  lay  timber  on  hand  ahead  of  orders 
so  that  we  shall  not  be  forced  to  use  unseasoned  stock  by  any 
uncommon  demand. 


i57 


The  position  of  the  pivot  from  which  the  lay  swings  with 
relation  to  the  position  of  the  crank  shaft  determines  the  eccentric- 
ity of  the  lay's  motion,  which  is  advisable  in  order  to  give  the 
shuttle  more  time  in  crossing,  and  also  to  help  give  cover  to  the 
cloth. 

After  a  great  deal  of  experimenting,  we  have  adopted  a 
design  suggested  by  Mr.  Robert  Burgess,  then  agent  of  the 
Grinnell  Corporation,  who  tested  looms  of  various  constructions 
for  us  in  determining  this  point.  It  is,  of  course,  understood 
that  all  of  these  jerky  motions  make  the  loom  run  harder,  and 
probably  bring  more  strain  on  the  warp,  but  long  experience 
has  determined  that  it  is  better  to  sacrifice  smooth  running  to 
other  considerations. 

The  raceway  for  the  shuttle  should  be  absolutely  true,  and  it 
is  advisable  to  go  over  looms  with  a  straight  edge  at  times  to 
detect  any  error.  The  raceboard  should  be  slightly  lower  than 
the  level  of  the  shuttle  boxes,  in  order  to  allow  for  the  thickness 
of  the  threads  which  rest  on  the  race  underneath  the  shuttle. 


REED. 

The  reed  should  be  either  set  in  an  exact  plane  with  the 
shuttle  box  bach  plates,  or  slightly  back  to  allow  for  variations,  as 
it  will  plane  the  shuttle  if  too  far  front.  It  should  be  set  at 
exact  right  angles  with  the  shuttle  race,  the  hand  rail  or  red-cap 
being  filed  to  fit,  and  forced  firmly  into  place. 

The  purpose  of  the  reed  is  simply  to  heat  in  the  filling 
threads,  and  furnish  a  back  guide  for  the  shuttle.  As 
the  dents  furnish  more  or  less  of  an  obstruction  to  any 
bunches   or  knots   in   the    yarn,    it   is    advisable    to    have    them    a- 


i«;8 


thin  as  is  practicable,  in  order  that  they  may  offer  little  surface 
for  side  contact,  and  also  he  free  to  give  slightly  when  necessary. 
In  order  to  have  a  good  running-  reed,  the  edges  of  the  dents 
should  be  straight  and  smooth.  In  nearly  every  case  where  mills 
have  complained  of  shuttles  wearing  excessively  on  the  hack,  it 
has  been  because  the  dents  of  the  reed  were  sharp,  scraping  the 
back-  of  the  shuttle-  like  a  fine  hie.  and  fluting  them  so  that  they 
looked  something  like  a  miniature  washboard. 

In  the  manufacture  of  reeds,  the  straightening  and  polishing 
of  the  dents  is  by  far  the  most  expensive  and  slowest  part  of 
reed  making,  and  when  not  properly  done,  simply  indicates  a 
poor  job.  and  an  attempt  to  make  an  extra  profit.  Sharp  reeds 
are  also  very  hard  on  the  warp  yarn,  the  blame  of  bad  running 
warp  often  being  put  on  the  quality  of  the  vain,  when  it  is  really 
the  reeds  that  make  the  trouble.  To  test  a  sharp  reed,  draw  the 
finger  nail  edgewise  across  it,  and  if  it  wears  the  nail,  the  reed  is 
sharp  and  not  properly  polished.  The  dents  should  not  bite  the 
nail  any.  and  should,  of  course,  be  in  line.  Manufacturers 
should  insist  on  having  smooth  reeds,  and  inspect  them  carefully 
to  be  sure  that  they  get  what  thev  order.  There  are  reed  manu- 
facturers who  supply  proper  reeds  and  have  pride  in  their  repu- 
tation. It  is  not  our  business  to  recommend  special  dealers,  but 
we  are  often  tempted  to  when  noting  what  inferior  supplies  are 
sometimes  attached  to  our  looms. 

The  reed  dents  should  be  as  thin  as  possible,  to  allow  elas- 
ticity and  can.  of  course,  be  made  deeper,  if  the  thinning  is 
inexpedient  without  it.  The  manner  of  holding  a  reed  in  the 
lay  is  not  so  positive  as  it  might  he.  since  reeds  vary  so  much  in 
contour.  We  formerly  used  an  adjustable fliter  hy  which  the  reed 
could  he  positively  clamped,  no  matter  what  its  size.  The  idea 
was  good  in  itself,  but  we  found  that  fixers  were  liable  to  screw 
the  bolts  up  too  tight  and  pull  the  reed  in  front  of  the  shuttle  box. 
We  have  therefore  gone  hack  to  the  old  reed  groove  system,  but 


'59 


have  improved  its  form  so  that  it  seems  sufficiently  efficient.  In 
order  to  fit  this  groove  properly,  it  is  necessary  for  customers  to 
send  us  several  pieces  of  different  reeds,  so  that  we  may  know  how 
much  their  size  varies. 


THROW  OF  LAY. 

When  the  lav  is  at  the  end  of  its  forward  stroke  it  must  he 
in  position  to  allow  proper  delivery  of  a  fresh  bobbin  or  cop  to 
the  shuttle.  Any  wear  of  parts  that  allows  the  lay  to  throw  for- 
ward too  much  should  be  taken  up,  and  if  it  becomes  necessary 
to  shorten  the  pitman  to  take  up  wear,  the  position  of  the  lay 
can  still  he  corrected  by  adjusting  the  eccentric  pins  in  the  lay 
swords  to  which  the  pitmen  are  fastened.  Of  course  it  is  only 
necessary  to  adjust  the  pin  at  the  hopper  end  of  the  lay  in  order 
to  <^et  the  shuttle  box  properly  under  the  hopper,  hut  great  pains 
must  he  taken  to  adjust  the  pin  at  the  other  end of the  lay  exactly 
the  same  amount,  or  else  the  lay  will  have  a  curious  eccentric 
motion,  one  end  beating  up  further  than  the  other,  causing  the 
shuttle  to  wear  into  the  reed  or  strike  the  shuttle  box  sides 
improperly.  If  the  wooden  parts  of  the  pitmen  wear  so  badly 
that  the  eccentric  pins  will  not  furnish  sufficient  adjustment,  the 
wooden  parts  should  he  replaced.  If  too  much  play  is  allowed 
in  the  pitmen  bearings,  there  is  possibility  <>f  cracks  or  slight 
thin  places  in  the  cloth  when  the  loom  stops. 


i6o 


SHUTTLE   BOXES. 

The  bach  box  plates  are  -et  at  exact  right  angles  with  the  lav 
end  plates  by  filing  the  ribs  or  fitting  strips  at  the  back  of  the 
plates.  The  back  box  plates  must  be  set  in  line  with  each  other. 
the  reed  being  preferably  set  slightly  back  of  this  line,  as  it  will 
not  do  to  run  any  chances  of  having  the  reed  in  front  of  this 
line.     A  long  steel  stra  is   necessary  in  order  to  trv  the 

plates  and  see  that  they  keep  in  position.  The  front  box  plates 
should  be  set  so  that  the  top  will  lean  slightly  toward  the  back 
box  plates,  thereby  reducing  the  liability  of  the  shuttle  raising 
in  the  box.  If  set  at  a  right  angle  it  will  probablv  work  all 
right,  but  it  must  not  lean /ram  the  back  box  plate.  At  the  same 
time  it  must  not  lean  much  toward  the  back  box  plate  or  it  will 
wear  the  top  of  the  shuttle.  With  back  binder  looms,  the  front 
plates  are  adjustable  and  should  be  set  so  as  to  line  the  point  of 
the  shuttle  in  the  centre  of  the  picker  stick  slot.  With  the  front 
box  plate  in  position,  adjust  the  binder  properlv  bv  loosening  the 
nut  on  the  bottom  of  the  lay  and  the  screw  which  passes  through 
the  binder  bearing,  turning  the  eccentric  bushing  with  the  fingers 
until  adjusted  to  the  proper  position.  We  have  had  a  great  deal 
of  experience  with  different  binder  materials,  at  first  being  ready 
to  follow  the  request  of  our  customers,  until  we  had  definitelv 
settled  the  matter  to  our  own  satisfaction.  A  binder  may  be  of 
wood,  wood  with  leather  face,  wood  with  steel  face,  wrought 
iron,  cast  iron,  or  iron  with  leather  attached.  We  now  prefer  a 
Jen  binder  faced  with  leather,  as  we  rind  that  leather  does  not 
wear  the  shuttle  so  badly  as  either  wood  or  iron.  Iron  binders 
bring  a  hard  pressure  on  the  shuttle  -u^hen  the  Zoom  i  with 

the  shuttle  part  way  in  the  box.  the  whole  force  of  the  momentum 
of  the  lav  being  transferred  through  the  protector  rod.  binder 
fingers,  and  binder  to  the  shuttle,  often  breaking    tss       s,  as  it  is 


i6i 


pinched  in  its  weakest  part.  The  wooden  hinder  will  give 
sufficiently  to  relieve  the  shuttle,  and  we  think  the  shuttle  boxing 
is  better  also  as  there  is  more  spring  to  the  wood  and  less  weight 
to  be  moved. 


PROTECTOR. 

The  protector  mechanism  on  the  Northrop  Loom  does  not 
differ  in  principle  from  that  on  other  looms,  so  that  detailed 
explanation  is  unnecessary.  On  our  recent  models  we  use  a 
novel  method  of  adjusting  the  binder  finger,  which  we  think  will 
appeal  to  fixers.  Protector  rods  sometimes  become  loose  through 
wear.  The  caps  which  hold  them  can  be  tightened  by  filing. 
The  pressure  of  the  binder  fingers  on  the  binders  is  regulated  by  a 
protector  rod  spring  in  the  usual  way.  Now  that  we  are  building 
front  binder  looms,  we  use  a  novelty  of  construction  which  ena- 
bles us  to  still  employ  the  ordinary  frog  and  dagger  protection. 


BRAKE. 

All  looms  are  equipped  with  brakes,  but  in  one  class  <>t 
looms  the  brake  is  worked  solely  from  the  protector  motion  when 
the  loom  hangs  off,  while  on  another  class  the  brake  also  oper- 
ates every  time  the  shipper  handle  is  thrown  off.  The  latter 
system  is  known  as  the  " Filling- Brake  system,"  for  with  the  com- 
mon   looms    the    brake    is    thus    applied    whenever    the    loom    is 


162 


stopped  by  the  tilling  motion  or  fork.     There  is  no  question  but 

that  the  application  of  the  brake  brings  serious  jar  and  strain  on 
a  loom.  We  know  this  positively,  for  we  have  many  records 
taken  of  looms  used  with  and  without  the  filling-brake  attach- 
ment, showing  that  looms  which  do  not  apply  the  brake  at  these 
frequent  intervals,  run  with  much  less  -  for  repair,  and  much 
less  loom  fixing.  We  thought  at  one  time  the  brake  was  also 
responsible  for  breaking  of  crank  shafts,  but  further  investigation 
proved  that  the  more  frequent  reason  tor  crank  shaft  break  _ 
came  from  the  strain  of  a  tight  belt,  as  noticed  particularly  in 
mills  where  looms  were  driven  from  small  pulleys  underneath 
the  floor,  with  short  belts  necessarily  kept  very  tight. 

While,  therefore,  we  have  a  filling-brake  sv-tem.  ami  a 
m>st  efficient  one  at  that,  we  have  recently  discontinued  its  use 
on  looms  weaving  goods  where  the  pick-  were  so  frequent  that 
the  stopping  of  the  loom  did  not  make  any  possibility  of  a  crack 
or  thin  place.  On  light  goods  we  shall  continue  to  apply  them. 
and  the  parts,  of  course,  are  applicable  to  looms  which  may  be 
-  :  out  without  them.  Our  loom  has  less  use  for  a  brake  than 
the  common  loom  as  it  does  not  stop  for  filling  exhaustion  or 
break.  _ 

Any  brake,  to  work  properly,  should  be  carefully  adjusted. 
When  the  brake  acts  by  the  motion  of  the  frog  holder  it  should 
not  bring  pressure  upon  the  wheel  before  the  belt  is  shipped. 
The  braking  surface  should  be  set  so  a-  to  bear  upon  as  much  of 
the  surface  of  the  wheel  as  is  possible.  This  can  be  done  by 
mean-  of  the  adjustment  at  the  bottom  end  of  the  brake.  The 
leather  on  the  brake  will  neeessarilv  wear  more  or  less,  requir- 
ing attention  in  order  to  obtain  the  best  results. 


163 


LOOM  ADJUSTMENTS. 

Every  new  loom  will  jar  screwed  parts  loose  In  the  first  few 
days  it  is  run.  All  screws  and  nuts  should  be  gone  over  care- 
fully, tightening  them  securely  when  loose.  There  are  main- 
theories  about  the  proper  adjustment  of  whip-roll,  harnesses,  and 
breast-beam  or  breast-roll.  If  cover  is  desired,  an  extra  strain 
should  he  brought  on  the  lower  shed  by  raising  the  whip-roll. 
breast-beam  or  breast-roll,  or  both.  Our  high-roll  looms  are  pro- 
vided with  liberal  adjustment  for  change  in  vertical  position. 
Whip-rolls  are  also  adjustable  for  the  same  purpose. 

In  weaving  drills  or  twills,  strain  is  frequently  brought  on 
the  top  shade  by  preference.  When  this  is  necessary,  the  whip- 
roll  and  breast-beam  should  he  practically  as  low  as  the  race  of 
the   lay. 

It  is.  of  course,  necessary  to  adjust  the  shedding  motion 
and  timing  of  the  picks  so  that  the  shuttle  can  pass  through  the 
shed  without  too  much  friction.  These  adjustments  must  vary 
with  the  width  of  the  cloth  woven,  as  it  is  obvious  that  with  a 
wide  loom  more  time  is  necessary.  Looms  are  built  with  the 
crank  shaft  set  lower  than  the  lay  pitman  pivot,  in  order  to  give 
more  time  for  the  shuttle.  The  use  of  a  short  pitman  accom- 
plishes the  same  purpose,  if  the  hearing  for  the  pitman  is 
extended,  hut  this  construction  necessitates  heavier  sword  castings, 
and  is  not  so  desirable  for  that  reason. 

The  pick  should  he  set  so  that  the  shuttle  should  just  begin 
to  move  when  the  lay  is  in  the  center  of   its  hack    stroke. 


164 


DRAWIXG-IX   WARP. 

Drawing-in  is  necessarily  expensive,  and  the  question  of 
twisting  in  warp  has  therefore  been  considered.  We  have  made- 
experiments  in  this  direction,  finding  there  was  an  actual  saving 
in  time  of  about  1  ^  minutes  per  warp.  The  loom  was  kept 
from  producing,  however,  during  the  time  of  twisting.  Of 
course,  warps  can  be  twisted  in  outside  the  loom,  in  a  frame 
made  for  that  purpose. 

Our  steel  harness  requires  no  extra  labor,  while  drop  wire 
warp-stops  add  to  the  cost  of  drawing-in.  Large  beams  natu- 
rally reduce  the  expense. 

The  Keene  drawing-in  frame  is  of  great  advantage  for  any 
of  our  stop-motions. 


SIZIXG    WARP. 


Where  drop  wires  are  used  with  cotton  harness,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  size  the  warp  with  additional  care,  taking  pains  to  put 
the  sizing  into  the  yarn  instead  of  on  the  outside,  as  is  the  cus- 
tom in  a  great  many  mills.  The  test  of  proper  sizing  is  found 
in  the  amount  of  tint  noticed,  and  the  average  :^arp  breakage 
counted.  No.  28  warp  yarn  should  not  break  more  than  10  to 
1 2  threads  per  day  with  a  cotton  harness  stop-motion  on  ordi- 
nary goods.  Slow  speed  at  the  slasher  gives  a  larger  percentage 
of  size.  With  our  steel  harness,  extra  sizing  is  not  necessary: 
in  fact,  not  advisable,  as  it  may  actually  increase  warp  breakage. 
We  recommend  the  following  mixtures  for  our  cotton  harness 
drop-wire  system  : 


i65 


Sizing  for    Sheetings:     ioo  gallons   of   water,    70   lbs. 

potato  starch.  4  to  5  lbs.  of  tallow,  1  gill  turpentine.  1  gill  of  blue 
vitriol :  boil  20  minutes,  or  longer  if  necessary. 

SlZING  for  Prints  :  120  gallons  of  water,  60  lbs.  potato 
.starch.  2  lbs.  of  tallow.  7  lbs.  of  Victoria  zinc:  boil  from  20  to 
30  minutes. 

Sizing  for  Medium  Weight  Goods:  120  gallons  of 
water.  65  lbs.  of  potato  starch.  7  lbs.  of  tallow.  5  lbs.  of  alum; 
boil  30  minute-. 

For  steel  harness  simply  add  more  water  to  the  above  mix- 
tures. Experiment  will  determine  the  proper  amount  for  the 
conditions  presented. 


LOOM  POWER. 


We  believe  that  all  authorities  are  wrong  on  the  question  of 
the  amount  of  horse-power  required  for  the  looms  built  today. 
The  old  experts  figured  from  tests  made  with  light  pattern 
looms,  run  at  low  speeds.  Every  builder  puts  more  weight  into 
his  loom  today,  and  higher  speeds  are  in  vogue.  It  is  possible 
that  our  loom  requires  slightly  more  power  than  the  common 
loom  for  the  same  goods,  as  it  uses  a  heavier  shuttle,  ami  we 
believe  in  a  stiff,  heavy  lay.  With  our  first  print-cloth  loom  we 
had  an  admirable  opportunity  for  test,  as  we  ran  a  room  of  So 
loom-  from  a  single  engine,  and  could  indicate  the  power  abso- 
lutely. At  190  picks,  they  showed  33-4  looms  to  the  horse- 
power, not  counting  the  shafting. 


1 66 


CLEANING  LOOMS. 

It  seems  needless  to  emphasize  the  necessity  of  keeping  any 
machine  properly  cleaned  and  properly  oiled.  Different  mills 
have  different  systems  in  this  respect,  some  insisting  that  the 
weaver  shall  clean  and  oil  his  own  looms,  while  others  have 
special  cleaners  and  oilers.  A  loom  should  surely  be  cleaned 
and  oiled  every  time  a  new  warp  is  put  in.  and  it  should  also  be 
kept  reasonably  clean  hetween  such  periods.  The  high-speeded 
mechanism  needs  oiling  more  frequently,  and  it  should  he 
remembered  that  every  place  where  two  metal  surfaces  are  in 
rubbing  contact  demands  oil. 

While  we  have  neyer  gone  into  the  question  of  testing  oils 
for  looms,  we  believe  that  poor  oil  can  do  as  much  harm  in  the 
weave  room  as  in  the  spinning  room,  and  we  recommend  fol- 
lowing the  advice  of  competent  oil  experts,  even  if  their  recom- 
mendation seems  to  involve  slight  increase  of  cost  in  the  oil 
itself. 


REPAIRS. 


It  is  somewhat  difficult  to  get  at  average  figures  of  expense 
in  this  line,  for  new  looms  will  need  more  frequent  repair  until 
the  weavers  and  fixers  get  used  to  them.  We  can  figure  fairly 
well  ourselyes  from  the  amount  of  parts  sold  to  our  customers, 
although  many  orders  are  for  parts  to  he  kept  as  stock  on  hand. 
Sometime  ago  we  figured  the  average  repair  cost  per  loom  per 
month  at    i:  iq   cents,  not   including  shuttles  ox  strapping.     We 


167 


understand  the  repair  cosl  of  the  common  loom,  including  shut- 
tles, is  about  $3  per  loom  per  year,  and  we  estimate  that  the 
cost  on  our  own  looms  would  certainly  be  under  $4:  in  fact, 
there  are  mills  using  both  common  and  Northrop  looms,  which 
inform  us  that  the  repairs  on  their  Northrop  loom-  are  actually 
less  than  on  the  common. 


PRODZCTIOX. 

Many  mills  take  advantage  of  the  capacity  of  the  Northrop 
loom  for  running  without  the  attention  of  the  weaver  by  start- 
ing the  machinery  before  the  weaver  arrives  and  also  running 
during  the  noon  hour  and  possibly  sometime  after  the  weaver 
has  left  at  night.  In  such  mills  the  production  is  often  over  100 
per  cent,  of  that  possible  during  regular  hours.  The  compari- 
son with  common  looms,  which  produce  less  than  90  per  cent.. 
i>  interesting.  It  i-  quite  common  for  Northrop  looms  to  give 
95  to  97  Per  cent-  °f  product  without  the  gain  by  running  over 
time.  -V  mill  should  not  be  especially  proud  of  this  showing. 
however,  for  it  simply  prove-  that  their  weavers  are  not  spread 
out  over  their  proper  number  of  looms.  It  may  take  many  years 
to  kill  the  popular  fallacy  that  production  of  cloth  per  loom  is 
the  great  end  for  attainment.  Production  per  weaver  is  rather 
the  end  that  should  be  aimed  at. 


i6S 


LOOM  SPEED. 

We  have  never  favored  high  speed  for  looms,  although  the 
Northrop  loom  can  run  at  high  speed  if  necessary.  Simplv  as 
an  experiment  we  have  run  one  of  our  print  looms  at  2S0  picks. 
We  have  had  looms  running  for  weeks  at  a  speed  of  220  picks. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  addition  of  our  novel  mechanism  which 
limits  the  speed  in  any  way.  Our  reason  for  advising  low  speed, 
therefore,  is  not  because  our  loom  is  handicapped,  nor  because 
we  wish  to  sell  more  looms,  as  some  uncharitable  persons  have 
asserted.  Increase  of  speed  increases  the  breakage  of  warp, 
requires  more  fixing  and  costs  more  for  repairs.  Since  the 
introduction  of  the  Northrop  loom  many  mills  in  this  country 
have  speeded  their  common  looms.  Perhaps  thev  wish  to  wear 
them  out  more  rapidly  and  thus  be  ready  earlier  for  replacement 
by  Northrop  looms.  We  doubt  if  there  is  any  other  good 
reason  for  the  change.  Thev  run  looms  at  high  speed  in 
England,  but  simply  because  of  the  domination  of  the  trades- 
unions,  which  will  not  allow  weavers  to  run  more  than  four 
looms.  Under  such  circumstances  the  manufacturer  is  bound  to 
get  all  the  product  he  can  from  each  loom  without  caring  espe- 
cially  whether  he  increases  the  number  of  duties  necessarv. 


COSTS. 

The  common  plain  loom,  as  ordinarily  built,  is  largely  a 
foundry  product  and  the  cost  necessarilv  varies  with  the  market 
prices    of   raw  materials.      In    1^94  we    learned    that   an    outside 


169 


builder  estimated  that  a  print  loom  weighing  900  pounds  figured 
$27  for  stock,  $9  for  labor,  $3  for  painting  and  $1 1  for  general 
expenses  with  profit,  making  a  total  of  $50.  Most  builders  put 
more  iron  in  their  plain  looms  today,  very  possibly  patterning 
after  our  own  increase  when  we  first  commenced  the  building  of 
looms.  We  invite  comparison  of  our  loom  as  a  machine  prod- 
uct with  any  other  made,  for  we  not  only  secure  uniformity 
by  machine  moulding,  but  we  also  put  more  tool  work 
into  the  loom  parts  than  any  other  builder  we  know.  Our 
foundry  castings  have  a  world-wide  reputation  and  our  tool 
equipment  for  the  manufacture  of  looms  is  entirely  modern. 
While  the  prices  we  charge  for  our  product  may  seem  high,  the 
additional  expenses  of  manufacture  must  be  taken  into  account, 
as  well  as  the  extra  mechanism  which  we  supply. 


WASTE. 


We  have  no  very  recent  figures  on  this  subject.  The  rilling 
waste  in  a  Northrop  loom  print  mill,  as  averaged  from  several 
weeks' test,  showed  .14  lbs.  per  loom  per  week  on  bobbin  filling. 


LOOM  EQUIPMENT. 

The  usual  common  loom,  as  sold  to  the  trade,  includes  no 
extras  in  the  way  of  parts  not  secured  to  the  loom,  except  the 
beams,  1   1-2  being  figured  to  each   loom.      Our   Northrop   loom, 


I  TO 


on  the  contrary,  is  furnished  with  one  shuttle  per  loom,  check 
stands,  shuttle  %uard,  filling  fork,  and  one  loom  scat  to  every  eight 
looms.  \\  e  also  furnish  steel  heddles  or  warp  stop  detectors  in 
quantities  as  ordered  and  supply  our  own  temples  of  whatever 
pattern  desired,  at  regular  prices.  The  following  list  specifies 
the  extras  which  are  usually  purchased  from  supply  dealers, 
although  we  can  furnish  sample  lots,  if  required,  at  their  prices : 
Lug  straps,  lease  rods,  Jack  sticks  for  cotton  harness,  strapping,  cotton 
harness,  reeds,  lease  rod  holders.  We  can  supply  ////';/  place  pre- 
venters on  order  and  also  sell  extra  pick  gears,  auxiliary  shaft  with 
gears  for  3.  4.  or  5-shade  work,  selvage  motions,  etc..  at  extra  cost. 


DOUBLE  PICK  CLOTH. 

In  view  of  the  many  attempts  at  introduction  of  weaving 
novelties  that  produce  cloth  with  two  thread-  in  a  shade,  we  might 
call  attention  to  the  fact  that  such  cloth  i>  easily  woven  on  our 
Northrop  loom  by  winding  two  threads  on  a  bobbin.  With  this 
system  double  production  i-  assured,  but  the  cloth  is  not  of  the 
regular  trade  standard.  We  mention  this  not  to  suggest  adop- 
tion, but  merely  to  prevent  waste  of  time  on  experiment  with 
double  bobbin  shuttles,  needle  looms,  etc. 


CLOTH  DEFECTS. 

Cloth  as  woven  is  usually  inspected  for  imperfections,  such 
as  thick  and  thin  places,  cracks,  oil  stains,  scratck-ups,  thread  runs, 
wrong  draws,  too  many  threads  in  a  harness  eye  or  reed  dent. 
overshots,  skips,  kinks,  loops,  unevenness,  bareness,  reediness,  lack  of 
weight,  or  narrow  width.  Thick  and  thin  places  are  usually 
caused  by  imperfect  action  of  the  let-off  or  take-up  and  on  the 
Northrop  loom  by  the  rilling  fork  being  out  of  order.  Cracks 
or  slight  thin  places  are  caused  by  the  loom  stopping  and  being 
started,  especially  if  the  weaver  turns  the  loom  over  while 
mending  in  warp  or  placing  the  shuttle.  Our  latest  take-ups 
are  arranged  so  that  they  will  not  operate  unless  the  shuttle  is 
picked.  Excessive  looseness  of  parts  in  the  loom  may  also  cause 
cracks  when  stopping  or  starting.  Our  double  fork  will  cure 
thick  and  thin  places  and  we  expect  to  produce  a  take-up  that 
will  absolutely  avoid  cracks.  Oil  stains  usually  result  from 
carelessness.  Care  should  be  taken,  for  instance,  in  oiling  the 
hopper  stud  on  a  Northrop  loom  not  to  let  any  excess  of  oil  drip 
on  the  filling  bobbins.  If  bobbins  are  allowed  to  drop  on  the  floor 
they  may  get  dirty  and  show  streaks  in  the  cloth.  Scratch-ups 
and  thread  runs  are  practically  obsolete  where  Northrop  looms 
are  used,  for  the  warp  stop-motion,  if  kept  in  order,  will  pre- 
vent either  one.  Wrong  draws  and  extra  threads  should  be 
detected  by  the  weaver.  Overshots  are  greatly  reduced  on  our 
loom,  especially  with  our  steel  harness  motion.  Of  course, 
overshots  are  possible  if  the  harnesses  and  pick  motion  are  not 
properly  timed.  Skips  are  also  caused  by  improper  adjustment 
of  the  harness  or  pick,  or  if  the  picker  is  not  in  proper  position. 
Kinks  result  from  filling  not  being  properly  conditioned 
and  also  from  weaving  goods  too  narrow  for  the  width  of  the 
loom.      Also  by  using  a  too  heavy  fork,  or  not  sufficient  friction  in 


the  shuttle.  Too  much  power  in  the  pick  will  also  cause  them. 
Loops  are  almost  always  caused  by  the  harness  not  shading 
properly,  especially  on  five-harness  goods.  Uneven  cloth  is 
usually  made  when  the  let-off  or  take-up  is  not  working  right, 
although  uneven  filling  will  also  give  the  goods  a  similar  appear- 
ance. The  faults  in  the  surface  appearance  of  the  cloth  are 
determined  from  the  standard  set  by  the  buyer,  and  this  may 
vary  so  that  a  fault  on  one  class  of  goods  would  not  be  detected 
on  another.  Weight  and  width  must  be  kept  right.  We 
believe  our  Draper- Roper  let-off  will  produce  more  even  goods 
than  any  other  in  the  market,  and  our  high-roll  take-up  principle 
will  also  assist  in  keeping  the  width  uniform.  Of  course,  the 
weight  will  vary  if  the  take-up  is  not  absolutely  uniform 
and  positive  in  action.  Our  iron  take-up  roll  is  also  of 
assistance  in  keeping  the  picks  uniform.  Another  defect, 
not  always  classed  as  a  defect,  is  the  mispick.  or  lack  of  thread 
in  a  shade  or  double  thread  in  a  shade.  With  ordinary  two- 
harness  weaving  the  presence  or  absence  of  threads  is  hardly 
apparent  except  on  close  examination.  When  goods  are  napped* 
it  is  highly  important  that  mispicks  should  be  avoided.  In 
common  loom  weaving  the  weaver  is  personally  responsible  for 
a  mispick,  as  he  can  find  the  pick  by  turning  the  loom  over  and 
taking  care  to  make  a  proper  jointure.  Some  weavers  escape 
mispicks  on  common  looms  by  stopping  the  loom  just  before 
the  filling  weaves  off  in  the  shuttle.  Our  feeler  mechanism 
copies  this  method  by  changing  the  filling  just  before  it  is  woven 
off.  It  has  been  found  that  the  Northrop  Loom  on  three-shade 
weaving  makes  less  mispicks  than  the  common  loom  as  run  in  the 
ordinary  manner,  for  the  usual  lapse  of  time  between  the  detec- 
tion by  the  fork  and  the  operation  at  the  hopper  brings 
the  new  thread  into  the  proper  shade  a  good  part  of  the  time. 
The  usual  weaving  expert  has  more  to  say  about  cover  on 
the    cloth    than    any  other   special  feature.      Cover  is  a  quality 


i73 


appealing   to   the   eve   by  evenness   and  to  the  feel  by  softness. 
Evenness   can   be    positively  produced   by   using  reeds  having  a 
dent  for  each   thread  and    may  also   be   apparently  produced  by 
weaving  with   the  upper  shed    slack   so   that   the   unevenness   is 
disguised.     A  soft  feel  is  produced  in  a  similar  manner  and  can 
also  be  given  by  use  of  soft  twisted  filling.     Cop  filling  undoubt- 
edly has  advantages  over  bobbin  filling  in  this  respect,  although 
it  is  possible  that  bobbin   filling   may   some  day  be   spun   with 
slacker  twist  ii"  desired.     Slackness  in  shed  is  produced  by  the 
relative  positions  of  the  breast  beam   and  whip  roll,  or  by  the 
angle  of  the  lay  when  beating  up.     Heavy  drop  wires  may  take 
some  of   the  slackness  out  of  the  top  shed,  but  we  have  never 
found  this  objection  important.      Bare   cloth  is  also  due  to  the 
harness  cams  not  being  suitable.      Sometimes   cloth  or  warp  is 
soiled  by  dirt  falling  through  belt  holes  in  the  floor  above.     All 
mills  should  be  thoroughly  equipped  with   belt   hole  guards  to 
prevent  such  difficulty.     Sometimes  oil  from  the  shafting  above 
the  loom  will  drip  on  to  the  cloth  or  warp.     Of   course,  as  cloth 
is  woven  from  yarn  made  in  other  departments,  its  defects  may 
be  due  to  conditions  outside  the  weave  room.      If  the  filling  yarn 
is  poorly  wound,  rings  of  yarn  will  slip  of,  making  double  filling 
in  the  cloth.     If  not  properly  moistened  it  will  kink.     Yarn  may 
be  made  from  dirty  roving  or  with  too  much  twist.     Of   course, 
the    slashing    of    the    warp    affects  the  weaving  and   the  goods 
woven.    All  the  departments  of  a  mill  should  work  harmoniously 
to  produce  the  necessary  result,  and   the  management   in   charge 
of  all  departments  is  directly  responsible  for  such  a  result. 


i74 

COTTON    MILL    PRODUCTS,    1900. 

(From  Census   Bulk-tin,   No.  215.) 
ARRANGED   IN  ORDER   OF   i'ARDS   WOVEN. 


Total 

Prints  and  converters  cloths 

Not  liner  than  Xo.  28  warp 

Finer  than  No.  28  warp    

Sheetings  and  shirtings 

Ginghams 

Napped  fabrics 

Fancy  woven  fabrics 

Drills 

Twills  and  satteens 

Ticks,  denims  and  stripes 

Duck,  total 

Duck,  sail  

Duck,  other  

Upholstery  goods 

Mosquito  and  other  netting 

Bags  and  bagging 

( !ottonades 

( 'orduroy, cotton, velvet  and  plush 

Yarns,  sewing  cotton  twine,  tape, 
and  other  products 

Total  value  of  all  products,  in- 
cluding above 


4,509,750,616 
1,581,613,827 

1,056.278.952 

525,834.875 

1.212.403,048 

278,302.708 

268,852,710 

237.841.003 

237,206,549 

235,860,518 

171,800.853 

12!  1,234.070 

11,750,151 

117.483.925 

50,334,609 

41.SS5.023 

30,039,616 

20.323.1147 

7,961.523 


«2 


1 00 
30 


*243,218,155 

57.780.940 

35.010). 575 

22.104.3(15 

55,513,032 

16,179.200 

18,231.044 

21,060.310 

11.S02.794 

14.301.302 

111.440,033 

14,203,008 

2,216,371 

12,046,637 

8,670,384 

S75.S0S 

2.554.192 

2.791.431 

2.082,017 


a  a 


450,682 

125,000* 


100.000 
25.01111* 
44.227* 
45,686 
30.000* 
28,839* 
18,000* 
15.000* 


5,000* 

4.500* 
4,421 
2.500* 
S00* 


89,588,001      1.709 
332,806,156 


*  Estimated  by  writer.      (The  report  only  separates  out  the  looms  on  certain  lines.) 


In  retelling  to  the  goods  which  it  is  now  possible  to  weave 
on  the  Northrop  looms,  it  might  be  simpler  to  mention  those 
which  can  not  be  woven,  for  the  Northrop  loom  has  been  suc- 
cessfully used  on  the  greater  majority.  We  weave  all  classes  of 
prints,  sheetings  and  shirting,  a  large  line  of  napped  fabrics, 
drills,  twills  and  satteens,  ticks,  denims  and  striped  goods;  in 
fact  practically  the  whole  held  covered  by  looms  that  weave 
with    one    shuttle,    no    matter   whether    they    use    plain    harness 


'75 


motions,  (lobbies  <>r  jacquards.  Our  Looms  have  been  specially 
successful  on  corduroys.  They  arc  also  weaving  bags,  window 
shade  cloth,  towels,  etc.  Quite  a  number  of  mills  are  using  our 
regular  loom  on  goods  made  with  silk  warp  and  cotton  filling. 
We  have  woven  worsted  goods  by  using  a  wooden  skewer  to 
hold  the  ordinary  worsted  bobbin.  We  see  no  reason  why  the 
Northrop  principle  should  be  restricted  to  cotton  looms. 


"We  have  been  running  twenty-six  of  your  Northrop  looms  for  a 
little  over  a  year  ami  it  has  occurred  to  me  that  yon  might  lie  interested 
in  results  obtained.  Our  percentage  of  seconds  tor  the  last  three 
months  from   these   looms,  for   all    causes,  such   as   thin    places,  button 

hole  selvedges,  oil  cords  in  filling,  etc.,  is  only  2.07  per  cent.    G Is 

weigh  2.85  yards  to  the  pound.  18s  warp.  15s  filling.  1  believe  this  is  a 
low  figure,  especially  as  these  goods  are  all  bleached  and  the  bleacbery 
reports  that  our  grading  of  tirsr  quality  is  strict  so  thai  they  have  prac- 
tically nothing  to  say  to  us  except  to  hold  the  goods  up  to  our  standard. 
Conservative  figures  show  that  the  looms  are  producing  about  '-W.j  per 
cent,  oi  theoretical  production  figured  on  our  actual  running  time.  We 
do  not  run  them  over  time   at   all.  as   some   mills  do.     Some   mills   ma\ 

show  a  larger  percentage  than  we  get,  bul  as  the  g 1-  must  hear  rigid 

inspection  I  think  the  results  produced  are  fair The  looms 

give  US  little  if  any  trouble  in  fixing,  and  repair  account  for  them  is 
very  Light.  We  are  running  them  I7n  picks,  which  b  somewhat  higher 
than  you  recommend  for  l~>"  reed  space  looms,  bul  they  give  US  no 
trouble  in  that  respect/1 — [Letter  received  from  customer  Sept.  28,  1900. 


••They  say  they  have  never  hail  any  complaint   from  the  selling 

house  in  regard  t<»  the  quality  of  their  (doth,  and  some  oi  the  g b  they 

are  weaving  in  6-cuts  rolls,  and  sending  it  ou1  even  withoul  inspecting 
it  at  the  mill"— [Expert's  Tteport  of  Dec.  12,  1903. 


176 


PRICES  AXD  PROFITS. 

The  price  demanded  for  a  new  machine  should  bear  a  per- 
tinent relation  to  the  profits  to  be  derived  from  its  use.  The 
machine  itself  may  be  absolutely  efficient,  accomplishing  all 
that  its  promoters  claim,  and  vet  demand  a  price  prohibitive  by 
reason  of  the  capital  required.  On  the  other  hand,  a  new- 
machine  may  be  sold  so  cheaply  as  to  give  little  encouragement 
to  the  builders  to  continue  its  improvement,  through  the  only 
possible  channels:  namely,  expensive  experiment.  Contrary  to 
a  popular  fallacy,  inventors  rarely  devote  their  time  and  energy 
entirely  for  the  good  of  the  world  at  large.  Those  who  develop 
and  introduce  the  inventions  are  certainly  not  so  unpractically 
altruistic.  There  is  no  reason  why  the  customer  should  not  pay 
a  proper  price  for  value  received :  and  vet,  in  the  general  intro- 
duction of  inventions,  it  is  necessary  to  give  the  customer  the 
lion's  share  of  profit,  in  order  to  secure  his  approbation.  The 
value  of  our  spindle  improvements  has  recently  been  estimated 
at  considerably  over  one  hundred  million  dollars;  and  yet  the 
return  in  price  paid  for  the  actual  spindles  themselves,  sold 
within  the  period  referred  to,  would  be  under  twenty  million 
dollars,  which  payment  must  cover  the  cost  of  the  spindles 
themselves,  the  cost  of  the  patents,  the  cost  of  expensive  litiga- 
tion, and  all  the  experiments,  advertising,  and  general  expense 
connected  with  the  industry. 

The  introduction  of  the  spindle  was  comparatively  easy 
compared  with  the  introduction  of  the  loom,  for  the  early  price 
of  new  spinning  with  high  speed  spindles  was  actually  less  for  a 
given  product  than  the  slow-  running  frame-,  while  with  our  loom 
the  price  is  nearly  three  times  the  price  of  the  competing  loom, 
so  far  as  the  amount  of  product  is  concerned.      There    is   always 


77 


a  protest  against  higher  prices,  no  matter  what  the  advantages 
may  be. 

Looking  at  the  introducer's  side,  it  is  evident  that,  having 
hut  seventeen  years  of  patent  protection,  several  years  of  which 
are  usually  used  up  before  actual  sales  are  made,  he  must  make 
enough  out  of  this  limited  period  to  repay  all  of  his  expenditure 
involved  in  perfecting,  protecting,  and  introducing  his  idea,  as 
well  as  a  fair  bonus  to  repay  for  the  risk  of  attempting  to 
improve  in  the  first  place.  The  profits  must  also  cover  the 
expense  of  hundreds  of  useless  experiments,  thousands  of  dis- 
used patterns,  possible  litigation,  extensive  advertising,  replace- 
ment by  improved  parts,  etc.  It  may  be  easily  demonstrated 
that  if  it  had  been  possible  to  sell  all  the  possible  customers  all 
the  looms  they  could  use  at  a  uniform  price,  none  of  them  would 
derive  appreciable  profit  from  the  operation ;  for  the  competi- 
tion amongst  themselves  would  reduce  the  profits  till  the  general 
public  received  all  the  advantages  of  the  new  economies. 
The  earlier  purchasers  of  our  looms  would,  therefore,  pre- 
fer to  see  our  introduction  gradual,  and  it  would  hardly  be 
fair  to  them  to  reduce  prices  in  favor  of  those  who  were  not 
so  willing  to  assist  by  patronage  in  the  early  years  of  trial.  We 
have  no  doubt  but  that  we  could  have  sold  a  great  main  more 
looms,  had  we  set  our  price  lower  in  the  first  place.  We  might 
even  have  made  as  much  profit;  perhaps  even  more.  It  would 
have  been  necessary,  however,  to  have  still  further  enlarged  our 
plant  for  such  a  purpose,  and  after  filling  the  more  numerous 
orders  given  to  replace  old  machinery,  we  might  easil)  have 
found  ourselves  over  equipped  for  the  regular  business  of 
supplying  new  mills  for  the  future. 

The  possible  profits  of  the  Northrop  loom  are  based  on  the 
actual  fact  that  with  them  a  weaver  can  produce  at  least  twice  as 
much  cloth  as  formerly,  often  three  times  as  much,  and  in  special 
instances  even   more,   by   tending  a   much    greater    number   of 


i78 


loom:-.  It  is  also  found  that  the  Northrop  looms  will  produce  more 
cloth  per  loom,  as  they  generally  run  for  a  greater  percentage  of 
the  time  and  in  many  mills  are  allowed  to  gain  still  more  by  run- 
ning during  the  noon  hour.  The  quality  of  the  cloth  is  often  bet- 
ter for  certain  purposes,  but  we  do  not  claim  yet  that  the  improve- 
ment in  quality  actually  increases  the  price  at  which  the  cloth  can 
be  sold.  We  do  believe  it  is  enough  better  to  give  a  preference 
and  we  believe  that  with  certain  of  our  later  devices,  employed  in 

large  quantity,  we  shall  actually  create  a  new  and 
better  grade  of  cloth  which  the  common  loom 
does  not  produce.  The  weavers  on  Northrop  looms,  bav- 
ins: actually  less  work  to  do.  even  while  tending:  three  times  as 
many  looms  as  formerly,  have  been  allowed  to  share  somewhat 
in  the  profits  bv  being  allowed  a  price  per  cut  at  which  they  can 
make  better  wages.  The  average  piece  price  for  goods  woven 
on  Northrop  looms  is  probably  a  little  less  than  half  the  former 
weaving  rate.  To  offset  this  gain  we  have  an  increased  cost  of 
the  loom  itself,  with  loss  of  interest  on  the  extra  investment 
money,  and  a  very  slight  increase  in  repairs  and  fixing,  although 
there  are  mills  which  claim  that  their  expenses  in  this  line  are 
actually  le>s  with  the  Northrop  loom.  Roughlv  figured,  the 
gross  profit  on  the  loom  should  run  from  $20  per  year  per  loom 
upward.  It  varies  with  the  scale  of  wages  paid,  and  the  number 
of  common  looms  formerly  tended:  for  instance.  Northrop  loom 
weavers  are  paid  six  cents  per  cut  in  Southern  mills  on  goods 
where  they  might  earn  nine  cent?-  in  the  North.  The  weaver 
that  changes  from  four  common  looms  to  twelve  Northrop  will 
show  a  greater  gain  than  one  who  changes  from  eight  to  twenty. 
There  are  many  incidental  advantages  in  the  lessening  of  the 
number  of  operatives  required.  When  we  take  half  the  help 
out  of  the  main  department  of  a  mill  we  greatly  lessen  the  num- 
ber of  tenements  necessary,  lessen  the  cost  of  bookkeeping  and 
paying   off.    and   less   personal    attention    is    required    from    the 


i79 


supervisors.  Our  loom  being  automatic  in  character,  requires 
much  less  skill  and  training  from  the  operative,  for  it  is  easy  to 

learn  to  run  Northrop  looms;  in  fact,  green  help  become  accom- 
plished weavers  in  a  much  shorter  period  than  with  common 
looms.  As  the  loom  is  automatic  and  therefore  more  responsi- 
ble for  errors,  there  is  less  chance  for  trouble  with  the  weavers 
over  bad  work  and  fines.  Some  of  these  matters  may  seem 
small  in  themselves,  but  thev  amount  to  considerable  in  the 
aggregate. 

We  have  labored  very  hard  to  overcome  traditions  in  weav- 
ing that  have  grown  up  out  of  the  long  ascendencvof  the  common 
loom,  and  we  believe  that  the  possibilities  of  automatic  weaving 
are  still  hampered  by  customs  originating  with  common  loom 
practice.  When  a  weaver  was  limited  to  four,  six  or  eight 
looms,  it  was  more  or  less  a  matter  of  pride  to  keep  them  run- 
ning, and  if  the  weaver  could  not  keep  a  certain  number  con- 
tinuously operating  he  was  forced  to  use  a  less  number.  This 
bred  the  instinctive  horror  of  a  stopped  loom,  which  prevails 
now  that  the  Northrop  loom  allows  a  much  greater  number  to 
the  operator;  yet  economv  actually  demands  that  a  weaver  with 
automatic  looms  should  have  enough  under  his  charge  so  that 
some  stopped  looms  would  be  more  or  less  of  a  necessity.  It  is 
quite  common  in  Northrop  loom  weaving  to  have  production 
run  as  high  as  95  per  cent,  of  the  possible  production  without 
counting  in  the  extra  gain  by  running  noon  hours.  It  is  a  com- 
mon thing  to  see  a  Northrop  loom  weaver  with  all  of  the  hop- 
pers lull  and  no  single  loom  stopped  for  any  purpose.  Such  a 
state  of  affairs  simply  proves  that  the  same  weaver  could  be 
given  a  greater  number  of  looms  if  it  would  be  possible  to 
educate  him  into  a  state  of  mind  that  would  not  look  on  the 
stopping  of  several  looms  at  a  time  as  a  terrible  error.  It  can  be 
easily  proved  that  it  would  be  much  more  economical  for  weav- 
ers to  get  So  per  cent,  off  of  30  looms  rather  than  00  per  cent,  off 


i  So 


of  20  looms,  or  95  per  cent,  off  of  16  looms,  provided  the  pay 
of  the  weaver  were  regulated  to  the  product  in  proper  propor- 
tion. We  believe  it  for  the  best  interests  of  the  loom,  the  help 
and  the  management  as  well,  for  the  Northrop  loom  weavers  to 
be  relieved  of  the  work  of   cleaning  and  oiling  their  looms. 

No  labor-saving  device  attains  its  full  efficiency  in  the  first 
few  years  of  use.  Our  later  large  hopper  looms  have  certainly 
enlarged  the  scope  of  the  weaver,  and  continual  improvement 
will  gradually  reduce  warp  breakage  and  other  loom  stops  due 
to  various  other  causes. 

The  problem  of  how  to  increase  earnings  is  often  solved  by 
enlarging  the  plant,  but  less  money  applied  to  the  improvement 
of  a  present  plant  may  sometimes  give  far  greater  returns  with 
much  less  inconvenience.  The  change  from  common  to  North- 
rop looms  requires  no  addition  to  floor  space.  As  above  noted, 
it  greatly  decreases  the  number  of  operatives,  and  therefore 
solves  a  most  perplexing  problem  in  localities  where  weavers 
are  scarce.  If  the  old  mills  will  not  appreciate  these  facts 
thev  must  face  the  competition  of  the  new  mills,  which 
start  with  more  modern  equipment.  We  are  frank  to  say 
that  the  hesitation  of  many  of  the  older  mills  has  been 
distinctly  disappointing,  for  we  should  like  to  see  them  share 
in  the  benefits  of  our  new  ideas  on  account  of  the  friend- 
ship founded  on  long  and  intimate  associations.  Failing  to 
induce  them  to  take  the  majority  of  our  products,  however, 
we  must  in  justice  to  ourselves  encourage  the  building  of  new 
plants.  We  should,  if  necessary,  place  our  looms,  even  if  we 
had  to  build  and  operate  mills  ourselves  in  which  thev  were 
used:  for  we  are  absolutely  convinced  that  the  mills  with  our 
machinery  can  make  profits  in  straight  competitive  lines  at  prices 
which  will  drive  the  older,  poorly  equipped  mills,  out  of  busi- 
ness. If  there  is  demand  enough  to  make  a  profit  for  all,  the 
mills  with  our  machinery  will   make  the  greater  part  of  it:   and 


iSi 


when  there  is  no  profit  at  all  for  the  older  mill,  the  newer  mills 
can  at  least  keep  a  balance  on  the  right  side  of  the  ledger. 

According  to  the  census  reports  there  were  in  1900  about 
450,000  cotton  looms  running  in  this  country  alone.  In  1904 
there  are  certainly  over  500,000.  Out  of  this  number  there  are 
probably  at  least  75.000  looms  running  on  tapes  or  narrow  wares 
and  with  box  motions  or  other  devices  that  practically  take  them 
out  of  the  field  of  filling  changing  mechanisms.  These  looms, 
however,  offer  an  opportunity  for  warp  stop-motions  which  we 
have  already  accepted  to  a  considerable  extent.  Taking  out  the 
Northrop  looms  already  delivered  and  running,  there  remains  a 
field  of  about  330,000  looms  for  us  to  replace,  as  this  number  of 
common  looms  is  still  used  on  goods  which  we  are  perfectly 
capable  of  weaving.  With  our  present  plant,  even  before 
recent  additions,  we  attained  an  output  of  2,000  looms  per 
month.  With  our  new  foundry  facilities  and  a  proper  increase 
in  tools  for  which  we  have  space  already  saved,  we  could 
undoubtedly  deliver  40.000  looms  a  year.  In  view  of  the  looms 
sold  to  new  mills  it  is  therefore  somewhat  doubtful  as  to  whether 
we  could  entirely  replace  the  old  looms  in  10  years'  time,  espe- 
cially as  we  should  be  foolish  to  increase  our  capacity  to  an 
extent  not  warranted  by  the  normal  future  demand  after  the  old 
looms  are  replaced.  The  trade  can  therefore  be  assured  that 
those  who  have  purchased  looms  now  will  have  at  least  10  years' 
advantage  over  those  who  delay.  The  earlier  purchasers  of  our 
looms  have  long  since  paid  for  them  by  their  profits,  and  these 
profits  are  practically  guaranteed  so  long  as  there  remains  any 
appreciable  number  of  common  looms  in  use. 

During  the  last  few  years  the  trade  has  noticed  main  peri- 
ods of  curtailment  by  large  numbers  of  mills  running  on  certain 
standard  lines  of  goods.  It  has  also  been  noticed  that  other 
mills  on  these  lines  of  goods  have  not  only  run  full  time,  but 
even  kept  running  during  the  night  hours   in    spite   of  the   disad- 


lS2 


vantages  of  such  a  practice.  The  main  difference  be- 
tween these  mills  has  been  that  one  class  run 
common  looms  and  the  other  Northrop  looms. 

It  is  not  to  be  supposed  that  the  introduction  of  a  revolu- 
tionary machine  like  the  Xorthrop  loom  is  effected  without  diffi- 
culty, annoyance  and  delay.  Those  who  use  common  looms  and 
haye  not  immediate  chance  for  replacing  them  are  naturally 
anxious  that  their  competitors  should  not  adopt  advantageous 
improyements.  Those  who  sell  common  looms  are  adyerse  to 
acknowledge  the  merits  of  their  competitors  and  the  influence 
of  a  large  body  of  manufacturers  with  their  salesmen  and  per- 
sonal friends  is  of  acknowledged  weight  and  importance.  There 
is  also  a  limited  class  who  haye  made  unsuccessful  experiments 
with  certain  lines  of  weaving  with  the  new  deyices  and  who  are 
not  disposed  to  admit  that  the  other  mills  can  be  more  successful 
than  themselves.  All  of  these  opposing  elements  together  create 
a  certain  atmosphere  of  doubt  and  a  disinclination  to  accept  facts. 
which  can  only  react  to  their  own  disadvantage. 

Apart  from  the  profit  derived  from  the  sale  of  our  looms 
there  is  a  distinct  personal  satisfaction  in  overcoming  the 
antagonism  of  these  varied  elements  and  proving  the  truth  of  our 
earliest  contentions.  It  has  always  been  held  to  be  a  difficult 
matter  to  convince  a  man  against  his  will,  but  difficulties  in  the 
undertaking  make  success  so  much  the  sweeter. 

Many  have  read  the  series  of  letters  that  were  written  to  the 
Manchester  Guardian  by  their  special  correspondent  who  visited 
this  country  with  the  delegation  that  inspected  our  cotton  industry. 
Nothing  recently  published  gives  an  equally  clear  and  compre- 
hensive view  of  the  trade  situation  from  North  to  South  by  an 
outside,  and  therefore  unprejudiced,  party.  The  following 
quotation  is  but  one  of  many  which  refer  to  the  paramount 
advantages  of  our  loom  : 

"The  mill  contains,  at  present,  25,000  ring  spindles  and 800  Nor- 
throp looms.     All  the  cloth  manufactured  i-  for  export,  and  consists  of 


i»3 


two  kinds  only,  namely — China  drills  and  sheetings  or  shirtings.  Drills 
are  .'fo  inches  wide  weigh  •'<  yards  to  the  pound,  and  have  68  ends  and  is 
picks  to  the  inch.  The  sheetings  are  36  inches  wide,  are  of  the  same 
weight  as  the  drills,  and  have  48  ends  and  4s  pick-  to  the  inch.  In  both 
cases  the  yarns  are  13.65s  twist  and  13.80s  weft,  the  CUtS  are  120  yard- 
long,  and  the  piece  rate  for  weaving  is  13  cents  a  cut.  The  rate  for 
weaving  similar  drills  in  Maine.  I  had  found  but  a  tew  days  before,  to 
lie  58  1-2  cents  for  120  yards,  and  that  was  less  than  the  Lancashire  rate. 
Mere,  the  cheapness  of  the  Southern  labor  and  the  use  of  the  Northrop 
loom  had  enabled  the  superintendent  to  undercut  the  Maine  weaving 
price  by  75  per  cent.  One  man  who  was  running  24  looms  told  me  that 
lie  could  earn  $1.35  per  day:  two  other  men  were  also  running  24  looms 
each,  and  said  they  could  make  81.50,  .  .  .  the  tacklers  tend  100 
looms  each." 

The  writer  also  refers  to  a  statement  made  to  him  in  Massa- 
chusetts to  the  effect  that  the  Northrop  loom  is  so  easily  managed 
that  an  inexperienced  girl  learned  to  run  14  of  them  within  a 
week. 

It  is  not  often  that  a  manufacturer  will  personally  admit  the 
extent  of  his  profits  by  use  of  the  Northrop  loom.  Recently, 
however,  it  became  necessary  for  such  a  manufacturer  to  file  an 
affidavit,  which,  being  a  matter  of  public  record,  we  quote  in 
part,  although  witholding  the  name  for  the  present.  In  referring 
to  a  large  number  of  looms  running  with  Northrop  attachments, 
the  affidavit  states  as  follows : 

'•  This  mill  is  one  of  the  most  modern  iu  this  country  so  far  as  equip- 
ment is  concerned.  The  average  pay  id'  the  weaver-  who  attend  to  these 
looms  (common)  that  weave  such  goods  is  nine  dollars  a  week.  Each 
weaver  takes  care  of  four  looms.  The  average  production  of  each  of 
these  looms  is  twenty-lour  yards  or  twelve  pounds  of  such  goods  per 
day.  This  would  he  one  hundred  and  forty-four  yard-  or  seventy-two 
pounds  per  loom  a  week,  making  five  hundred  and  seventy-six  yards  or 
two  hundred  and  eighty-eight  pounds  of  such  goods  a  week  for  the  four 
looms  taken  care  of  by  each  weaver.  This  is  the  only  mill  of  which  I 
have  knowledge  where  the  weaver  can  take  care  on  an  average  of  as 
many  as  four  looms."*     (On  this  Style  of  goods. 

"The  cost  of  manufacture  id'  such  goods  for  the  wage-  of  the 
weaver  only  is  about  3.12  cents  per  pound.     With  less  improved  looms 

for  producing  such  g 1<.  of  which  many  are  in  use.  the  cost  is  greater 

as  a  weave]-  cannot  take  care  * •  t  so  many  looms.'' 

The  affidavit  then  states  that  the  use  of  our  devices  on  these 
goods  increases  the  production  to  38  yards  per  loom,  or  10  pounds 
of   such  goods  a  dav.      As  a  weaver  attends  six  looms  of   the  new 


1S4 


style,  the  production  per  day  per  weaver  is  228  yards,  or  114 
pounds  of  such  goods.  The  cost  per  pound  is  about  1.31  cents. 
or  a  saving  per  loom  per  year  of  over  $100  each.  The  affidavit 
states  that  the  profits  from  such  looms  will  be  about  9  per  cent. 
on  the  entire  cost  of  the  plant,  including  carding  and  spinning 
machinery,  and  if  the  plant  were  to  consist  solely  of  looms,  the 
saving  would  pay  a  dividend  of  about  19  per  cent,  on  the 
cost.  The  affidavit  also  calls  attention  to  the  greater  product 
per  loom  as  requiring  less  looms,  less  floor  space,  etc.  In  fact 
100  looms  at  this  ratio  of  product  would  do  the  work  of  i^S 
common  looms.  On  this  basis  the  saving  in  number  of  looms 
and  floor  space  would  possibly  pay  for  the  entire  cost  of  the 
attachments,  as  these  are  one  of  the  most  expensive  tvpe  of 
loom  built. 

Of  course,  it  is  evident  that  this  is  a  pecular  class  of  weav- 
ing, inasmuch  as  the  weaver  only  changes  from  four  looms  to 
six  ;  yet  the  greatly  increased  product  shows  that  the  weavers  on 
six  looms  are  producing  more  than  twice  as  much  cloth  per 
weaver  compared  with  the  common  loom  product.  This  affidavit 
was  not  made  with  the  intent  of  aiding  us  in  any  way  by  its 
information;   in  fact,  we  only  ran  across  it  by  accident. 

We  recently  learned  from  an  Indian  cotton  manufacturer, 
now  in  this  country,  that  in  India  his  weavers  run  two  looms 
each  and  earn  $7.50  per  month.  This  seems  a  very  low  price, 
but  as  a  matter  of  fact  it  is  $3.25  per  loom  per  month,  or  $39 
per  loom  per  year.  There  are  plenty  of  Northrop  loom  mills  in 
the  United  States  where  the  wages  are  under  $20  per  loom  per 
year,  although  the  American  weaver  may  be  earning  five  times 
as  much  money.  Of  course,  it  is  probable  that  Northrop  looms 
may  invade  India  itself  and  the  coolie  may  run  four,  or  eight,  or 
sixteen,  instead  of  two  common  looms.  Theoretically,  all  manu- 
facturing could  be  done  cheaper  in  such  countries  as  China  and 
India  —  but  practically  the  high  wage  countries  hold  their  own. 


iS5 


Yet  the  only  reason  they  do  hold  their  own  is  because  they  take 
prompt  advantage  of  economical  methods  and  devices.  The 
mills  that  defer  using  Northrop  looms  until  India  is  equipped, 
will  have  to  face  a  serious  proposition.  But  why  should  they 
wait? 

We  were  recently  permitted  to  see  a  record  from  the  hooks 
of  a  large  Northern  mill  using  both  Northrop  and  common  looms. 
The  figures  were  based  on  a  low  scale  of  weaving  wages  for  the 
common  loom.  The  figures  showed  an  actual  difference  of 
$23.52  per  loom  per  year  in  favor  of  the  Northrop  loom  above 
all  extra  expense  for  supplies,  fixing,  cleaning,  etc.  The 
weavers  on  the  Northrop  loom  also  earned  $55.12  each,  per  year, 
above  the  earnings  of  the  common  loom  weavers.  This  record 
is  based  on  sixteen  Northrop  looms  to  the  weaver.  Some  mills 
already  run  twenty-six  Northrop  looms  to  the  weaver. 

Recently  noting  a  broker's  list  of  Southern  cotton  mill 
stocks  for  sale,  with  prices  bid  and  asked,  the  writer,  as  a  matter 
of  curiosity,  separated  out  the  mills  which  had  bought  Northrop 
looms,  and  figured  a  comparison  in  the  value  of  the  stock  as 
quoted.  The  price  asked  was  taken  in  each  case,  the  price  bid 
being  added  in  only  where  there  was  no  asking  price.  The  total 
result  showed  that  28  mills  without  Northrop  looms  averaged  a 
stock  value,  as  thus  figured,  of  $102  a  share.  The  37  other 
mills,  having  Northrop  looms,  averaged  on  the  same  basis,  $114 
per  share. 

Prices  of  looms  vary  somewhat  with  cost  of  materials  and 
equipment  desired.  Thev  should  properly  vary  in  proportion  to 
the  expense  and  utility  of  new  attachments.  We  do  not,  how- 
ever, add  to  the  price  of  our  loom  when  improving  its  funda- 
mental features.  It  has  been  estimated  that  we  have  actually 
added  $15  of  cost  per  loom  to  our  complete  machine  since  its 
earlier  stages.      We    are    sflad    to    estimate    on    whatever    looms 


iS6 


are  desired  and  specified.  Old  common  looms  arc  taken  in 
exchange  at  fair  allowance  under  certain  conditions. 

Our  policy  of  smashing  up  old  common  looms  taken  as  part 
payment  for  new  Northrop  looms  has  awakened  a  certain  amount 
of  comment,  the  visiting  Englishmen  being  particularly  im- 
pressed. Of  course,  some  of  these  old  looms  have  outrun  their 
utility  and  are  fit  only  for  junk  in  any  event.  Many  looms  thus 
replaced,  however,  have  been  comparatively  new  and  certainly 
efficient  so  far  as  common  looms  may  be  efficient. 

One  of  the  frequent  English  visitors  to  our  country  pub- 
lished a  comparative  criticism  of  the  Northrop  loom  on  his 
return  home,  that  endeavored  to  show  how  little  actual  saving 
was  possible.  In  view  of  the  wide  circulation  of  the  article,  as 
copied  by  various  trade  journals,  we  thought  best  to  issue  an 
answer  at  some  length,  taking  up  the  various  comparisons  in 
detail  and  explaining  the  falsities  on  which  the  final  figures  were 
based.  We  were  rather  embarrassed  in  replying  by  the  fact 
that  while  the  Northrop  loom  mill  was  well  known  to  all,  the 
common  loom  mill  selected  by  comparison  was  not  named,  and 
the  assertions  of  speeds,  wages,  etc.,  relating  to  that  mill,  could 
not  be  verified.  Without  repeating  our  argument,  we  might  say 
that  we  found  several  reasons  to  criticise  the  assumptions  made, 
and  if  any  expert  who  cares  to  venture  further  in  this  line  will 
give  us  detailed  information  as  to  the  source  of  his  facts,  we 
will  be  glad  to  enter  into  a  further  discussion.  The  comparison 
of  one  mill  in  one  definite  locality,  with  another  mill  several 
hundred  miles  away,  is  not  necessarily  convincing.  The  best 
comparison  possible  is  that  of  Northrop  looms  and  common 
looms  running  in  the  same  mill,  under  the  same  conditions. 
Our  best  customers  include  the  mills  that  have  made  this  experi- 
ment for  themselves,  and  we  are  ready  to  contend  that  these 
mills  are  perfectly  capable  of  figuring  cost  and  appreciating 
conditions. 


iS7 


"How  the  introduction  of  this  new  loom  affects  the  cost  of  labor 
may  be  shown  by  a  comparison  of  two  accounts  of  the  cost  of  labor  in 

print  Cloth,  line  taken  by  myself  from  a  mill  account  of  older  date,  hut 

from  line  of  the  best  mills  in   New   England,  and  the  other  fr the 

workings  of  recent  date,  received  from  a  mill  hut  a  few  days  ago. 

COST  <)F   LABOR   IN   ONE   POIND  OF   PRINT  CLOTH. 
(28  inches,  64x64.  seven  yards  to  the  pound. 


Carding 

Spinning 

Preparing  for  loom 

Weaving 

<  Hher  lahor  expenses 

Total  lahor  cost 

Difference  on  account  of  improved  loom 
All  other  differences 


lss7. 
Cents. 

1898. 
(  ents. 

0.855 
1.137 

0.697 

2.S 

0.239 

0.7 
1.1 
0.7 
1.6 
0.25 

5. 728 

4.35 

Differences. 
1808. 

Cent-. 


0.155 
0.037 
-0.003 
1.2 

-11.011 

1.378 

1.2 


0.178 


The  items  covering  all  other  manufacturing  processes  are  scarcely 
worth  noticing.  The  difference  is  almost  entirely  traceable  to  the  new 
loom 

Now,  by  no  possibility  can  the  strain  which  the  Xorth  could  he 
subjected  to  by  the  South  be  so  great  as  the  strain  the  Northern  mill 
has  to  sustain  from  Northern  mill,  and  the  Southern  mill  from  South- 
ern mill ;  for  the  same  causes  may  be  found  in  operation  in  the  Smith 
that  produce  the  differences  in  the  North.  The  differences  of  this  pro- 
nounced type  are  created  by  the  introduction  of  the  so-called  "auto- 
matic" loom.  When,  by  this  change,  50  per  cent,  in  the  weaving-cosf 
can  be  saved,  it  is  obvious  that  it  will  not  take  long  to  convince  mill- 
owners  that  it  is  profitable  to  discard  the  loom  which  was  satisfactory 
until  very  recently,  and  to  adopt  the  new  loom  by  which  an  expert 
weaver  can  turn  out  from  two  to  three  times  as  much  cloth  in  a  week." 
—  [Jacob  Schot  nhof. 


••The  manufacturers  are  perfectly  willing  to  try  any  new  device 
that  may  come  out  in  the  way  of  new  machinery;  and  no  better  exam- 
ple of  that  can  he  given  than  the  fact  that  the  automatic  loom  ha-  round 
its  home  in  the  Smith  almost  exclusively,  and  the  advantages  of  the 
automatic  loom  are.  by  the  Southern  manufacturers,  deemed  t"  lie  very 
much  in  its  favor,  as  against  the  ordinary  running  loom.  Several  man- 
ufacturers said,  in  fact,  that  it  was  QOi  hard  to  secure  '.'7'o  per  cent.  <'f 
the  full  possible  production  of  the  loom." —  [Mr.  .u>  /■-•<  /•.  A'.  )".  Journal 
of  '  'ommerce. 


INS 


"GOOD  WEAVING  WORK.— A  correspondent  at  Spartanburg, 
s.  c.  writes  us  that  they  have  weavers  at  Spartan  Mill  No.  2  running 
30  Draper  looms.  One  is  a  woman,  and  she  has  taken  off  iu  February 
up  to  the  night  of  the  13th,  326  cuts,  51  yards  to  cut,  which  is  50  35-100 
yards  per  loom:  speed  of  loom  180,  64x<'>4  goods,  which  makes  97  86-100 
of  production.  How  is  that  for  running  Northrop  Draper  looms?" — 
[Textile  Excelsior,  Feb.  18.  1899. 


••There  can  he  no  doubt  that  the  enormous  expansion  of  the  Ameri- 
can cotton  industry  during  recent  years  has  been  very  largely  owing  to 
the  Northrop  loom,  and  the  conviction  is  steadily  gaining  ground  in  this 
country  that  only  by  the  general  adoption  of  the  Northrop  loom  can 
our  cotton  trade  lie  put  once  more  upon  a  thoroughly  sound  basis."— 
[Letter  from  London  correspondent  to  The  Indian  Textile  Journal,  printed 
September,  1903. 


One  of  the  cloths  made  here  very  largely  in  the  40-inch  looms 
is  32  inches  wide  and  has  6S  ends  and  112  picks  to  the  inch  of  42*s  twist 
and  36's  weft.  It  is  woven  in  62  yard  cuts,  and  the  price  paid  to  the 
weavers  is  2714  cents  per  cut  for  the  Northrop  loom  and  56  cents  per 
cut  for  the  ordinary  loom.  The  latter  is,  I  believe,  10  per  cent,  less 
than  the  rate  paid  in  Lancashire,  but  the  ordinary  eight  loom  weaver 
here  can  earn  *9  a  week  and  the  Aveaver  who  runs  twenty  Northrop 
looms  £10.50  to  £11. — [Correspondent  of  Manchester  Guardian. 


For  the  2000  Northrop  looms  there  are  134  weavers — a  number 
which  I  verified  by  counting  the  names  in  the  overseer's  wase-book. 
Some  of  the  weavers  are  running  20  40-in.  Northrop  looms  each,  others 
16.  and  a  number  of  learners  have  12  each,  the  average  for  the  whole  of 
the  2000  looms  being  a  fraction  less  than  15.  .  .  . — [Correspondent  of 
Manchesti  r  Guardian. 


••<  ailed  at  the Mills  :  found  them  exceedingly  pleased  with 

the  Northrop  looms.  They  are  getting  an  average  of  between  26  and 
27  yards  per  day.  which  is  more  than  two  yards  more  than  they  get 
from  their  common  looms.  They  are  weaving  78x80  goods.  40"  wide. 
52  yard-,  and  pay  20  cents  a  cut  against  42  cents.  The  weavers  are  run- 
ning 20  looms:  there  are  two  lixers  on  204  looms,  and  the  only  extra 
help  in  the  room  is  two  boys  for  cleaning  and  oiling." — [Salesman's 
Report,  Oct.  10.  1903. 


••Their  weaving  is  running  extremely  well,  and  they  have  on  1182 
Looms,  which  they  have  been  running  an  average  of  about  191.,  looms 

per  weave]-,  and  Mr. is  sure  they  will  lie  able  to  bring  it  down 

to  an  average  of  22  looms  to  the  weaver  throughout." — [Expert's  Report 
•    Y  o.  14.  1903. 


1 89 


"Mr. said  the  only  fault  he  can  find  with  the  Northrop 

Looms  today  is  that  they  use  too  much  filling.  Since  he  came  here  he 
had  had  to  pur  two  extra  spinning  frames  on  to  spinning  tilling  for 
these  loom-,  and  now  he  has  just  put  on  the  third.'* 

(In  another  mill  .  "Mr. .the  overseer  of  weaving,  say.-;  they 

are  getting  93  per  cent,  product  from  the  Northrop  looms.  26  looms  to  a 
weaver.  163  picks  per  minute." — [Extract  from  Expert's  Report,  Dec.  12, 
1003. 


••The  work  at  this  mill  is  running  very  nicely  indeed.  They  now 
have  some  weavers  running  30  looms  each,  and  with  all  their  looms 
running — 1292  I  understand — they  have  only  59  weavers  at  the  present 
time,  and  expect  to  spread  the  weavers  further  the  coming  week." — 
[From  Expert's  Report  of  J<m.  16,  1004. 


"The  weavers  are  still  running  20  looms  each  here,  but  it  is  hardly 
enough  for  them.  There  was  less  than  5  per  cent,  of  the  looms  stopped, 
aud  the  overseer  thought  I  had  made  a  mistake  in  count,  as  he  said  he 
was  weaving  OS  per  cent,  right  aloiis;." — [From  Expert's  Report  of  March 

26.  1904. 


"On  their  print  looms,  the  weavers  are  running  from  16  to  28 
looms.  Most  of  the  weavers,  however,  are  running  20.  24.  and  26. 
They  pay  for  weaving  b%  cents  per  cut  of  52  yards." —  [J*rom  Expert's 
Report  of  April  16.  1904. 


"In  No.  1  mill  I  saw  one  room  with  216  looms  in  it  being  run  by  six 
weavers.  These  weavers  run  86  looms  each,  cotton  harness  ami  double- 
thread  stop-motion.  The  goods  an'  80x88  25s  warp  33s  filling.  Four 
hoys  till  the  batteries  for  this  room,  and  they  are  getting  as  much  pro- 
duet  as  when  the  weavers  ran  24  loom-  each  and  tilled  their  own  bat- 
teries. The  overseer  says  be  expects  to  get  a  larger  product  than 
before.  The  weavers  like  this  arrangement  better  than  the  former  one. 
The  overseer  told  me  that  the  weavers  tell  him  that  filling  the  batteries 
is  more  than  half  of  their  work." — [Expert's  Report,  April,  1904. 


"They  have  an  average  of  about  is  looms  to  the  weaver,  and  are 
making  prints  64x60,  paying  '','4   cents  a   cut    for  54  yards.'*— [From 
's  Report  of  May  7, 1904. 


190 


In  order  that  this  volume  shall  be  complete,  we  refer  again 
to  the  change  in  price  of  our  Northrop  loom  shuttles.  On 
December  1.  1903,  we  sent  a  letter  to  all  of  our  loom  customers, 
stating  that  while  our  former  charge  was  $1  each  for  new  shut- 
tles sold  for  repairs,  with  an  allowance  of  35  cents  for  equal 
number  of  old  shuttles  returned,  customer  paving  freight,  our 
standard  price  from  the  above  date  would  be  J^  cents  each,  we 
no  longer  asking  for  anv  old  shuttles  to  be  returned,  leaving  the 
mill  to  use  parts  of  old  shuttles  for  their  own  repairs  when 
advisable,  no  allowance  whatever  to  be  made  in  future  for  old 
parts,  as  we  do  not  care  to  have  them  returned  to  us.  When 
our  original  allowance  of  35  cents  was  first  voted,  we  expected 
to  use  such  good  parts  as  were  serviceable  in  the  old  shuttles, 
but  finding  such  repairing  inadvisable,  we  sent  out  regular  new 
shuttles  on  such  orders.  Our  customers  were  put  to  consider- 
able annovance  and  expense  in  saving  the  old  shuttles,  and  pay- 
ing boxing  and  freight  charges.  We  believe  our  new  arrange- 
ment will  be  much  more  satisfactorv  to  all  parties  concerned. 

Although  our  shuttle  is  made  under  some  of  our  most 
important  patents,  the  new  price  onlv  gives  us  a  small  manufac- 
turer's profit,  without  royalty  charge.  Our  shuttles  are  much 
more  expensive  than  the  common  loom  shuttles,  and  our  meth- 
ods of  manufacture  include  a  high  standard  of  care  and  pre- 
cision. 


•■Mr. said  the  last  time  the  treasurer  was  there  lie  wanted  to 

go  in  aud  see  the  Northrop  looms.  Every  loom  was  running  and  the 
weavers  sitting  down.  The  treasurer  said  that  was  enough,  he  did  not 
care  to  see  the  rest  of  the  weaving.  The  overseer  told  the  agent  in  my 
presence  that  it  is  hard  work  to  get  weavers  tor  hi-  common  looms,  as 
they  all  want  the  Northrop." — [From  Expert's  Report  of  March  26,  1904. 


191 


THE   LABOR    QUESTION. 

While  there   have   been   a  few  cases   of   labor  difficulty   in 

adjusting  the  new  conditions  introduced  by  our  Northrop  looms, 
they  have  really  been  most  surprisingly  infrequent,  considering 
the  radical  changes  introduced.  A  mill  that  changes  from  com- 
mon to  Northrop  looms  necessarily  discharges  half  its  weaving 
force,  but  the  scarcitv  of  good  weavers  is  proverbial  and  the 
surplus  thus  produced  is  easily  assimilated.  In  the  adjustment 
of  wages  to  the  new  conditions  disputes  have  not  prevented  the 
further  adoption  of  our  looms,  or  reduced  its  advantages  to  a 
minimum.  The  general  policy  followed  by  the  purchasers 
of  our  looms  has  been  to  allow  weavers  to  earn  more  pay 
in  tending  them  than  they  formerly  received  on  the  common 
looms.  In  many  cases  this  extra  wage  has  been  very  liberal 
indeed,  considering  the  fact  that  the  weavers  really  had  less  work 
to  do,  and  a  less  irritating  series  of  operations.  There  is  no 
difficulty  involved  in  changing  from  the  common  to  the  Northrop 
style  of  weaving.  Weavers  should  certainly  credit  us  with  the 
relief  from  sucking  rilling,  for  prior  to  our  introduction  of  the 
Northrop  loom,  it  is  doubtful  if  any  appreciable  per  cent,  of 
shuttles  in  use  on  common  looms  had  hand-threading  or  self- 
threading  devices.  Since  the  advent  of  our  loom,  more  hand- 
threaded  shuttles  have  come  into  use,  but  their  proportionate 
number  is  still  quite  small.  The  sucking  of  tilling  is  naturally 
attended  by  many  physical  evils,  especially  where  the  filling  is 
colored.  Common  loom  weavers  are  a  short-lived  class,  as  a 
rule,  their  lungs  becoming  packed  with  cotton  fibre  inhaled 
when  sucking  filling.  Another  curious  danger  inherent  in  com- 
mon loom  practice  comes  from  the  changing  around  of  weavers 
on  different  sections  of  looms.  We  have  heard  of  an  actual 
case  in  which  three  weavers  are   said  to  have  caught  consump- 


I92 


tion  from  using  the  shuttles  of  a  consumptive  weaver;  and  other 
objectionable  diseases  are  transferred  by  the  same  application 
of  the  lips  to  shuttles  used  by  infected  parties. 

More  hand-threaded  shuttles  would  undoubtely  be  used  if  the 
ordinary  hand-threaded  shuttle  was  as  efficient  as  the  closed-eye 
shuttle  for  general  weaving.  It  has  taken  us  a  great  many  years 
to  develop  an  efficient  open  eye  for  our  own  purpose,  and  our 
patents  undoubtedly  control  the  better  forms  of  eye  for  either 
hand-threading  or  self-threading.  We  have  been  asked  fre- 
quently to  fit  our  eyes  to  common  shuttles,  but  do  not  care  to 
confuse  our  systems  or  encourage  the  retention  of  uneconomical 
machinery. 

The  advantages  of  automatic  weaving  have  raised  a  curious 
question,  certain  interested  parties  contending  that,  as  there  are 
labor  laws  restricting  the  hours  of  labor,  these  same  laws  apply 
to  the  machinery,  so  that  Northrop  looms  should  not  be  allowed 
to  run  without  attention  during  the  noon  hour,  or  at  other  periods. 
The  mill  managements  naturally  claim  that  it  is  immaterial 
whether  automatic  machinery  runs  overtime  or  not  if  no  help  is 
in  attendance.  The  opposition  might  as  pertinently  object  to 
the  continuous  operation  of  the  solar  system.  It  is  inter- 
esting to  note  that  the  very  antagonism  directed  against  the 
Northrop  loom  is  a  sure  evidence  of  its  superiority.  The  very 
fact  that  it  does  produce  cloth  with  economy  of 
labor,  suggests  the  mistaken  notion  that  it  is  therefore  worthy 
of  opposition  by  the  laborers  themselves.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
however,  there  are  more  weavers  given  employment  to-day  than 
there  were  before  the  Northrop  loom  was  introduced.  The 
introduction  of  a  labor-saving  machine  is  so  gradual,  of  necessity, 
that  it  rarely  causes  any  real  commotion  and  change  of  immedi- 
ate conditions.  In  progress  there  must  be  continual  readjust- 
ments. It  is  only  in  countries  like  China,  that  do  not  progress, 
that  conditions  are  stable. 


*93 

These  previous  pages  were  printed  in  our  edition  of  July. 
1904.  Since  that  period,  the  cotton  industry  has  know,,  the 
greatest  strike  in  its  history ;   the  trouble,  however,  centering  in 

a    section  where   Northrop   looms    were    not   yet    adopted.      The 
primary  question  involved  was  one   of   wages,    pure  and  simple ; 
but  after  the  main  strike  was  settled,  there  was  still   considerable 
difficulty    over   the    12-loom    system,    so    called,    under   which    a 
weaver  was   expected    to    run    more    looms  when   given  a    warp 
stop-motion,    and    sometimes    a    larger    supply    of    filling   in    the 
shuttle.      It  will  he  noted  that,  whereas  certain  mills  were  giving 
weavers    16   of  these   looms,    the    general    official    protest   of  the 
operatives  as  an  organization  was  made  against  the  12-loom  num- 
ber, the  weavers  protesting  that  even   where  warp  stop-motions 
and   long  bobbin   systems   were   applied,    there    was   too    much 
labor  involved   in   keeping  that    number   going.      The    manufac- 
turers, who  had  been  put  to  an  expense  of  at  least  $2;;  per  loom, 
naturally    insisted   on    weavers    receiving    less    pay    per    product 
when  given  the  supposed  advantages.      Neither  the   weavers    nor 
the  manufacturers  attempted  to  show  by  actual   figures  whether 
there  was  more  labor  involved  or  not.     The  problem   is  hardly 
beyond  comprehension,  for  a  weaver's  work  consists  in  perform- 
ing a  certain  number  of  operations,  S  common  looms  requiring 
under  ordinary  conditions  about  600  separate  acts   per    day,    or 
one  a  minute.     These  operations  include  the  taking  off  of  cloth, 
the  replacing  of   rilling    in    the    shuttle,    and    starting   up    looms 
where  the  filling  has  broken  in  the  shuttle;    also  the   mending  of 
warp    threads,    and    possible    scratching    out    of    filling    due    to 
Moats,   or   other    serious    defects.      The    extra    looms  with   warp 
stop-motion    add    to    the    number    of    operations    in    taking    off 
cloth,     and     they     increase     the     labor    of     mending    warp,    as 
the   weaver  must  come  to  the   loom    every  time  a   single   warp 
thread    breaks,    with    the    warp-stop    system.      On    the    common 
loom,  they  may  let  several  ends  break  before  stopping  the  loo,,, 


i94 


to  mend  the  fault.  The  long  bobbins  should  reduce  the  number 
of  filling  replacements :  but.  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  long  bob- 
bins make  more  filling  breakage  in  proportion  to  their  yarn  than 
short  bobbins,  especially  near  the  beginning  of  the  wind.  Some 
mills  have  allowed  weaver-  to  take  out  bobbins  partially  woven, 
the  same  being  sent  to  the  spinning  room  and  quilled  into  full 
bobbins.  This  relieves  the  weaver,  but  adds  a  considerable 
expense.  as  quilling  is  a  costlv  process.  It  is  well  known  that 
where  the  weavers  are  required  to  weave  off  all  of  the  yarn  on  a 
bobbin,  that  thev  often  cut  it  with  a  knife,  which  hurts  the  bob- 
bin :  or  even  surreptitiously  take  such  bobbin-  home  from  the  mill 
to  use  for  stove  fuel.  If  the  increase  in  the  number  of  looms 
makes  the  weaver  perform  more  than  600  operations  per  day. 
the  work  is  certainly  harder.  It  would  take  very  little  time  to 
settle  this  matter  by  actual  count.  There  may  be  little  profit  in 
giving  a  weaver  more  looms,  if  the  product  is  reduced  per  loom 
bv  the  operation.  To  figure  profit  under  such  circumstances,  it 
i-  necessary  to  appreciate  the  amount  of  capital  invested  in 
the  machinery,  computing  the  amount  idle  or  unproductive,  and 
thereby  losing  interest,  if  the  product  be  not  maintained  at  the 
regular  standard. 

S  me  of  the  pres-  comment  on  the  situation  has  been  very 
severe  on  the  weavers  themselves,  calling  them  stupid  and  den-e 
because  thev  apparently  protest  against  the  adoption  of  auto- 
matic machinery.  We  can  say  fur  weavers  as  a  class,  however, 
that  thev  have  treated  the  introduction  of  the  Northrop  loom  in 
all  sections  and  in  all  countries  in  a  very  sensible  way:  so  -eligi- 
ble, in  fact,  that  we  are  inclined  to  think  that  their  protests 
against  the  so-called  "automatic"  looms  with  warp  -top-motion 
and  long  bobbin,  are  founded  on  inherent  disadvantages  in  the 
system  itself.  We  must  not  allow  the  public  mind  to  get  con- 
fu-ed.  An  automatic  machine  generally  employs  a  mechanism 
that  runs  without  human  direction.      A-  a  matter  of  fact,  a  warp 


■95 

stop-motion  interferes  with  the  continual  running  of  the  loom, 
although  it  does  improve  the  product.  The  long  bobbin  intro- 
duces no  new  automatic  principle  whatever.  It  simply  changes  an 
element  of  quantity.  The  real  automatic  device  is  the  Northrop 
filling-changer,  which  we  alone  control.  There  is  no  reason 
why  Ion-- bobbins  cannot  he  used  in  connection  with  our  own 
loom:  in  fact,  they  are  using  long  bobbins  in  manv  Northrop 
looms  as  it  is. 

The    following   quotation    from    the    Providence   Journal    is 
very  pertinent  in  this  connection  : 

"It  is  patent  to  all  who  have  investigated  the  subject  that  the  dav  is 
net  tar  distant  when  a  competition  so  close  as  to  leave  room  for  the  fib- 
test  only  will  force  the  corporations  of  New  England  to  adopt  the 
latest  devices  in  labor-saving  machinery,  regardless  of  expense  Curi 
ou-.lv  enough,  as  one  authority  has  pointed  out,  the  objection  to  anv 
radical  re-equipment  just  at  present  comes  from  the  side  of  capital  and 
is  responsible  in  no  small  measure  for  Fall  River's  embarrassment  and 
the  destructive  sacrifices  which  she  has  been  making.  \<  a  rule  and 
for  reasons  that  are  obvious,  the  objection  to  contrivances  and  inven- 
tions calculated  to  lighten  toil  and  reduce  the  length  of  pav-rolls  arises 
lion,  the  ranks  of  the  operatives,  futile  as  it  always  lias  been  and 
must  be. 

But  for  once,  managers,  deterred  by  first  cost  and  a  period  of 
depression,  have  rebelled  against  the  outlay  involved  in  the  required 
cnanges.  And  in  their  effort  to  compromise  with  their  pocketbooks  bv 
experimenting  with  a  "stop-motion"  for  looms,  they  have  driven  the 
help  beyond  the  point  of  human  endurance.    At  least',  this  is  the  charee 

preferred  by  the  operatives  concerned.     It  is  not  ami  never  has  I u  « 

question  oi  wages  solely.     It  follows  that  what  is  true  of  the  Fall  River 
companies  in  the  particulars  cited  must  he  true  of  a  majoritv  of  the 
companies  m  this  section, and  sooner  or  later  all  of  them  will  be  called 
upon  to  meet  the  issue.     It  is  contended   that   Southern   mill,     of  com 
paratively  new  construction,  have  an  advantage  in  the  matter  of  We&v 
ing  alone  which  cannoi  he  overcome  by  makeshifts." 

In  view  of  the  frequent  labor  troubles  connected  with  the 
cotton  industry,  it  is  perhaps  of  interest  to  call  attention  to  a 
few  facts  taken  from  records  made  by  careful  historians.  lp  to 
1850,  there  had  been  but  one  cotton  mill  strike  on  record  in  the 
whole  United  States,  although  the  labor  conditions  were  much 
harsher  than  now  and  the  wages  much  less.  In  the  early  half 
of  the  century,  laborers  worked  for  various  periods,  according 

to  the  season    of   the   year,    fourteen    hours    per    day    being    quite 


196 


common.  The  earlier  corporations  exercised  a  sort  of  paternal 
authority  over  their  help,  some  mills  even  insisting  that  each  of 
their  employes  should  attend  church  every  Sunday.  The  wages 
were  very  Low,  weavers  on  two  looms  in  Fall  River,  early  in  the 
century,  earning  30  cents  per  day  at  a  price  of  one  cent  per  yard 
(at  least  this  is  so  reported  by  credible  authority.)  Board  was 
cheap,  being  at  the  rate  of  $1 .75  per  week  for  men  and  $1.25 
for  women.  Supplies  of  every  kind,  on  the  contrary,  were 
very  high,  all  manufactured  articles  being  necessarily  expensive 
in  the  days  of  crude  machinery  and  expensive  transportation. 
As  the  laborers  had  little  time  outside  their  working,  eating  and 
sleeping,  there  was  little  chance  to  spend  a  surplus,  even  if  they 
were  able  to  accumulate  one.  It  is  of  interest,  however,  to  note 
that  the  annual  operatives'  ball  at  Lowell  priced  its  tickets  at  $5 
each. 

The  present  conditions  of  cotton  mill  labor  in  the  South 
present  features  of  exceeding  interest.  It  is  asserted  that  there 
are  300.000  spindles  stopped  in  South  Carolina  alone,  for  want 
of  help.  This  scarcity  seems  to  affect  the  carding  and  spinning 
departments,  and  the  common-loom  weave  rooms.  There  are 
plenty  of  Northrop  loom  weavers,  and  operatives  ready  to  learn 
to  run  Northrop  looms,  for  the  wages  earned  on  Northrop  looms 
have  induced  spinners  and  carders  to  leave  their  former  employ- 
ment. The  whole  difficulty  started  from  the  assumption  that 
Northrop  looms  would  only  double  the  productive  power  of  the 
operative.  When  the  price  per  cut  for  weaving  on  Northrop 
looms  was  reduced  to  one-half  the  former  standard,  it  was 
assumed  that  the  weaver  would  earn  a  little  more  than  before, 
owing  to  the  larger  percentage  of  product  per  loom  :  but  weavers 
soon  stretched  out  to  triple  the  former  number  of  looms  in  many 
cases,  and  the  price  per  cut  was  not  always  proportionately  les- 
sened. It  is  said  by  some  southern  manufacturers  that  there  is 
no  real  scarcity  of  help,  but  that  help  will  not  work  regularly 


197 


since  the  higher  wages  have  been  paid,  as  they  need  some  spare 
time  in  which  to  spend  their  surplus.  The  pay  per  side  for 
spinners  in  some  sections  in  the  South  is  higher  than  in  the 
North. 

Wage  questions  always  solve  themselves  in  time  by  applica- 
tion of  the  ever  present  influence  of  supply  and  demand.  We 
are  not  inclined  to  interfere,  or  even  advise,  on  a  matter  that 
directly  affects  the  mill  and  the  operative.  We  can  point  out, 
however,  that  the  present  conditions  prove  that  our  loom  has 
greater  possihilities  than  were  at  first  outlined,  and  the  end  is 
not  vet  reached. 

A  change  from  present  common  looms  to  Northrop  can 
promptly  remedy  the  present  difficulty.  There  are  still  thou- 
sands of  common  looms  running  in  southern  mills.  The  extra 
help  liberated  by  discontinuing  common  looms  would  naturally 
be  absorbed  in  other  departments.  A  comparison  of  advan- 
tages shows  that  the  successful  southern  mills  really  prosper  by 
their  greater  use  of  Northrop  looms.  Southern  manufacturers 
have  frankly  admitted  that  they  were  gratified  that  northern 
mills  did  not  so  promptly  appreciate  the  advantages  of  automatic 
weaving.  There  are  southern  mills  using  the  Northrop  loom  on 
print  cloth,  where  the  weavers  are  paid  5  1-2  cents  per  cut  of  52 
yards,  with  no  extra  expense  for  help  to  fill  bobbins.  Some  of 
these  mills  run  66  hours  per  week  and  get  over  100  per  cent,  of 
production  from  the  looms  by  letting  them  run  unattended  dur- 
ing the  noon  hour,  in  one  coarse  sheeting  mill  there  are  1300 
Northrop  looms  where  they  have  never  had  more  than  56 
weavers,  and  often  less. 


I9S 


ATTEMPTS  AT  COMPETITION. 

It  is  clearly  in  evidence  that  we  were  the  first  concern  to 
successfully  introduce  filling  changing  looms  and  warp  stop- 
motions  to  the  general  weaving  trade.  It  is  also  true  that  no 
other  concern  has.  to  our  knowledge,  ever  kept  one  single  lot  of 
100  filling  changing  looms  in  operation  without  oversight  of 
shop  help  and  shop  experts.  Even  with  the  dozen  or  more 
shuttle-changing  looms  exploited  in  England,  their  total  sales  are 
most  meagre.  We  are  not  at  all  worried  about  the  competition 
of  shuttle-changers — thev  have  mechanical  limitations  inherent 
in  their  principle.  Thev  also  add  complication  and  do  not 
relieve   the   weaver  of  the  work  of   shuttling"   the   bobbin 

and  threading  the  shuttle  eye.      We  simply  advise 

those  afflicted  by  the  experimental  itch  to  defer  payment  for  any 

shuttle-changing  looms  purchased  until  satisfaction  is  assured. 

As  to  warp  stop-motions,  the  competition  is  severe  since  a 
lot  of  old  patents  showed  mechanisms  which  could  he  amplified 
into  practicability  so  soon  as  a  demand  was  created.  We 
believe  that  we  control  the  better  forms,  but  are  not  anxious  to 
sell  them  at  cost  for  use  on  common  looms  in  order  to  meet  the 
prices  set  by  inferior  mechanisms.  Many  purchasers  insist  on 
having  our  motions  irrespective  of  price. 

The  combination  of  warp  stop-motion  with  long  bobbin  has 
already  been  referred  to  under  the  labor  heading.  This  cheap 
substitute  for  automatic  weaving  is  simply  an  attempt  to  defer 
the  inevitable  purchase  of  new  looms.  We  shall  not  take  fur- 
ther time  to  expose  the  defects  of  the  system,  for  we  have  a  cer- 
tain sympathy  for  those  who  are  forced  into  unwilling  economies. 

The  competition  that  will  prove  of  real  interest  is  to  start 
with  the  expiration  of  certain  of  our  original  patents.  Sample 
looms  are  actually  being  tested  while  impatient  owners  are  ner- 


99 


vouslv  watching  the  hands  of  the  clock.  Possible  customers  arc 
even  deferring  purchase  of  Northrop  looms  until  this  competi- 
tion shall  start,  expecting  a  general  lowering  of  prices  at  that 
time. 

Now  we  will  be  perfectly  frank  and  admit  that  our  early 
patents  of  1891  will  expire  in  1908 — three  years  from  now. 
We  took  out  these  patents  at  a  time  when  we  thought  we  had 
perfected  the  necessary  principles:  hut.  as  a  matter  of  fact,  we 
did  not  have  a  loom  that  we  considered  satisfactory  for  the  trade 
until  189^  and  some  of  the  vital  features  of  that  loom  were  pro- 
tected by  patents  of  that  date  and  later.  Our  first  trade  loom, 
then,  cannot  he  duplicated  until  after  191  J. 

But  our  loom  of  189^.  if  sold  today,  could  not  compete  with 
the  loom  we  are  making,  even  at  a  much  lower  price.  It  will 
be  still  less  able  to  compete  with  the  loom  which  we  shall  be 
building  in  191  2.  We  therefore  assure  our  past  customers  that 
they  need  have  little  anxiety  over  competition  from  cheaper 
automatic  looms  and  we  advise  possible  new  customers  that  the} 
are  losing  much  in  possible  profits  by  hesitation. 

We  have  not  built  up  the  most  important  branch  of  textile 
machinery  manufacture  in  the  world  and  strengthened  it  by  pro- 
tection of  hundreds  of  patents,  to  sit  tamely  by  and  let  other- 
reap  the  profits.  It  has  cost  many  men  years  of  struggling  ami 
much  in  resources  to  disturb  our  past  business  and  we  have  lost 
no  confidence  by  the  outcome.  This  automatic  loom  field 
belongs  to  us  while  we  continue  to  develop  all  the  improvements 
that  make  it  valuable.  We  discovered  the  possibilities  of  auto- 
matic weaving  and  succeeded  where  hundreds  had  failed.  Let 
others  also  improve  and  not  confine  their  time  to  copying  our 
products  years  after  we  have  ourselves  made  them  obsolete. 

We  are  of  course  prompt  to  challenge  infringement  when- 
ever we  consider  our  rights  antagonized.  We  instituted  a  suit 
against  the   American   Loom   Co.   who   exploit   the  "Harriman 


200 


Loom"  and  it  has  been  running  several  years.  The  delays  have 
led  certain  parties  to  assume  that  we  were  not  pressing  the  case. 
but  the  records  will  show  that  we  have  done  all  within  our  power 
to  bring  it  to  a  speedy  conclusion. 

We  were  ourselves  sued  by  one  Henry  M.  Hewes,  owner  of 
certain  patents  taken  out  by  J.  II.  Nason  on  hand-threaded  shut- 
tles. The  decision  was  wholly  in  our  favor  when  it  came  to  a 
bearing  and  no  appeal  was  entered. 

\\  e  call  special  attention  to  the  fact  that  we  have  acquired 
by  direct  assignments  a  patent  formerly  owned  by  Malcolm  G. 
Chace,  ami  many  patents  formerly  owned  by  William  H.  Baker 
and  Frederic  E.  Kip.  covering  a  large  held  of  filling-changing 
devices  for  automatic  looms,  including  various  electrical  connec- 
tions, and  special  adaptation  of  mechanism  for  special  problems, 
particularly  relating  to  changing  of  filling  before  exhaustion. 
This  control  does  not  include  patents  of  Baker  and  Kip  relative 
to  warp-stop  devices.  We  expect  to  enforce  our  rights  over 
infringers  of  these  various  patents  as  fully  as  with  regard  to  any 
other  patents  owned  and  controlled  by  us. 

We  also  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  on  Nov.  21.  1899. 
there  issued  to  Joseph  Coldwell  and  Christopher  Giles  Gildard 
a  patent.  Xo.  637.234.  covering  certain  elements  of  warp-stop 
mechanism.  On  Julv  30.  1901.  there  issued  a  reissue  of  the 
above  patent.  Xo.  11,923,  in  which  twelve  additional  claims 
were  granted,  covering  the  suspension  of  detectors  from  single 
threads,  so  that  each  thread  is  normally  out  of  contact  from  the 
detectors  suspended  from  the  adjacent  threads.  We  have 
acquired  the  sole  and  exclusive  right  to  make,  use  and  sell 
mechanical  warp  stop-motions  containing  the  claims  of  said 
reissued  letters  patent,  and  are  authorized  and  empowered  to 
bring  suit  in  the  name  of  the  patentees  against  any  person  who 
shall  infringe  said  reissued  letters  patent. 

In  order  to  correct  certain  natural  errors,  recently  published, 


201 


it  may  be  well  to  state  that  the  Draper  Company  never  owned 
any  rights  in  foreign  loom  patents.  The  Xorthrop  Loom  Com- 
pany, organized  in  1892,  sold  its  United  States  rights  to  the 
Draper  Company  in  1897  and  its  English  rights  to  the  British 
Northrop  Loom  Co.  Limited  in  1902.  It  still  retains  many 
Foreign  rights ;  in  fact,  receives  royalty  from  shops  in  France, 
Germany,  Switzerland  and  Austria. 


PATENT    CONTROL. 

It  is  not  wise  for  owners  of  important  patents  to  express 
their  opinion  regarding  priority,  or  importance,  for  the  courts 
may  not  coincide  with  their  judgment,  and  evidence  may  develop 
unappreciated  circumstances.  We  think  it  safe  to  say,  however, 
that  to  James  H.  Xorthrop  belongs  the  credit  of  inventing  the 
original  filling-changing  loom  and  its  most  important  original 
details.  General  Draper  conceived  the  idea  of  combining  a 
warp  stop-motion  with  the  filling-changer,  and  the  earlier  prac- 
tical devices  in  this  line  were  developed  by  Mr.  Charles  F. 
Roper.  Our  feeler  devices  are  controlled  by  basic  patents  of 
George  Otis  Draper.  These  three  distinct  lines  of  novelty  have 
been  further  developed  by  continued  contributions  of  these  same 
inventors,  as  will  be  seen  by  our  table  of  inventions,  and  also  by 
a  long  list  of  Hopedale  experts,  such  as  Mr.  Edward  S.  Stimp- 
son  and  Mr.  Jonas  Xorthrop.  whose  entire  time  is  devoted  to 
loom  improvement.  Our  experimental  department  now  includes 
Mr.  C.  II.  Draper  and  Mr.  E.  S.  Wood,  whose  contributions 
have  been  quite  numerous.  Outside  inventors  have  often  given 
us  valuable  ideas:  the  majority  of  which,  however,  have  received 
considerable  modification  by  our  own  inventors  before  being 
included  in  our  regular  loom  output. 


It  is,  of  course,  our  intention  to  SO  continually  improve  our 
loom  as  to  prevent  competition  from  our  own  inventions  after 
their  seventeen-year  patent  expiration.  We  believe  the  50-loom 
weaver  a  coming  possibility,  and  we  intend  to  improve  the 
quality  of  the  goods  produced  as  an  associate  feature  of  our 
loom  introduction. 

In  thus  detailing  our  intentions  with  regard  to  the  protection 
of  our  property,  we  do  not  wish  it  assumed  that  we  take  any 
"dog  in  the  manger"  position.  We  believe  we  control  all  the 
feasible  means  for  making  practical  automatic  looms,  and  we  are 
willing  and  ready  to  accept  orders  for  these  looms,  fitted  for 
their  intended  purpose-  according  to  the  best  of  our  judgment 
and  experience.  We  have  not  always  been  ready  to  furnish 
looms  according  to  terms  specified  by  customers,  especially  when 
they  ask  for  combinations  or  elimination  of  devices  which  we 
considered  impractical  for  the  purposes  desired.  We  have  no 
wish  to  see  our  looms  run  at  a  disadvantage,  having  a  pride  in 
their  success  and  a  reputation  which  we  cherish.  Neither  have 
we  anv  intention  to  decrv  the  merits  of  any  of  our  competitors' 
productions.  We  shall  certainly  point  out  any  disadvantages 
inherent  in  their  devices  if  thev  compete  with  machinery  pro- 
duced by  us  which  we  consider  more  efficient  and  more 
satisfactory  to  the  customer. 

In  presenting  a  list  of  our  Northrop  loom  patents  we  do 
not  make  it  exhaustive,  for  the  simple  reason  that  we  do  not 
care  to  expose  our  control  of  a  great  number  of  patents  which 
may  not  stand  in  our  name  as  of  record.  We  are  protected  by 
use  of  large  numbers  of  patents  for  purposes  of  litigation, 
which  are  at  present  in  others'  direct  ownership. 

Our  principal  loom  inventors,  however,  include  the  follow- 
ing names,  they  haying  assigned  to  us  the  patents  as  noted  in 
the  period  from  July  1.  1 888,  to  July  1.  1905:  (Plain  temple 
patents   not   included.  ) 


Adkins,  A.  B i 

Allen.  W.    E 5 

Ambler,  G.  B.....  2 

Armstead,  M.    J. 1 

Arnold,  C.  II 1 

Aube,  A. 1 

Aumann,  L.  A. 2 

Austin,  B.  F.  S 3 

Bailey,  S.  C 1 

Bailey.  W.   II 1 

Baker,  W.  II 34 

Barber,  W 1 

Barnes,  L.  E ....  1 

Bartlett,  E.   E 1 

Beardsell,  A.  W 3 

Benson,  A.  E. 5 

Benson,  O. 2 

Betsch,  J 1 

Bevil,  S.  H 2 

Bigelow,  M.  J.  3 

Boisvert,  G. 1 

Bolton,  J.  B.   1 

Bracken.  II.  W 2 

Brooks,  J.  C 11 

Broomhead,  \V.  II.    1 

Brown,  L.  II. 1 

Brunette,  L 1 

Burgess,  R.  1 

Burton,  J.   L. 3 

Chace,  M.  G.                  1 

Chan  Her,  I.  W.  1 


Chapman,  R.    J 

Chase.  C.  E 

Chins.  J.  A. 

Clarkson,  A.  R.    

Clement.  A.  \Y.   

Cobb.  F.  G 

Cobb,  J.  II - 

Cobb,  W.  C 

Cold  well,  J 

Collins,  G.  A. 

Conn,  J.  .         

Cote,  H 

Cray,  H.  W 

Cunniff ,  E. 

Cunniff.  J.  V S 

Cutler,  W.  E 

Cutting:,  S.  B 


Davenport,  E.  W. 2 

Day,  C.  M S 

Denney,  D.  W 1 

Dobbins,  B.  J 1 

Donner,  \Y 1 

Draper.  C.    II. 1  7 

Draper,  E.  .S. 2 

Diaper.  G.   A.  3 

Draper.  George  Otis  28 

Draper.  W.   F 3] 

Dudley.  S.  A 1 

Dumont,  M. 2 

Durkin,  D 3 

Dustin.  J.  F.  4 


-°4 


Eaton,  W.  G S 

Eaves,  A.  i 

Edmands,  A.  B i 

Edwards.  J.  C.   7 

Emery,  A.  D. 3 

Fischer.  A.  C. 1 

Fittz.  W.  B 1 

Foss,  S.  C 1 

Foster,  J.  H 2 

Fowler,  W.  A.  2 

Frost,  C.  W 1 

Gendron.  J.  A 1 

Gildard,  C.  G. 1 

Gleason,  O.  1 

Goulet,  J.  A.  G. 1 

Hall,  W.  E 1 

Hawley,  C.  T 1 

Haynes.  "\Y 3 

Hinchliffe,  W 1 

Holdridge,  ().  E.  1 

Home,  A.  P. 1 

Howard,  C.  S 1 

Hull,  A.  A 1 

Hunnewell,  H.  T.  1 

Hyde,  K 1 

Jamieson,  R 3 

Janelle.  B 2 

Janelle,  0 4 

Johnson,  J.  P 2 


Jones.  H. 1 

Jordan.  II.  W 1 

Jordan,  J 1 

Joy.  C.  L 1 

Keelev.  J.  W.  2 

Keene.  \Y.  L.  1 

Keith,  J. 1 

Keller.  R.  R 1 

Kip,  F.  E.  36 

Kirk.  J.  T 1 

Knox,  C.  1 1 

Lacey.  F.  5 

Lacey.  W.  1 

Lamb,  J.  A 1 

Land.  C.  II 1 

Landry.   0 1 

Lane,  J.  J. 1 

Ledonx.  V.  A 2 

Lee,  B.  F 1 

Littlefield.  C.  A.  12 

Ludlam,  J.  S 1 

Mahoney,  D.  D 1 

Marcoux,  A.  M 5 

Mason.  E.   P 2 

McKay.  J.  L 1 

McNerney,  T.  H 1 

Mehaifey.  J.  M 1 

Mommers,  R.  S 2 


205 


Mooney,  T.  3     Russell,  C.  \V 1 

Muldowney,   |.   }. 2      Rvon,  E.  II.  1 


Northrop,  J.  II S6 

Northrop,  Jonas  33 

Nutting,  C.  E. 5 

O'Connell,  P.  J 1 

Oldfield,  W. 2 

Oswalt.  J.  L 1 

Owen,  H.  W 2 

Parker,  G.  H 2 

Peck,  I.  F 2 

Peckam,  J.  H. 

Phelps.  L.  M 

Piper,  O 

Piron,  V 

Pratt,  A.  K 

Raby.  Z 

Railton,  J 3 

Reilly,  P 

Remington,  H.  A 

Rhoades,  A.  E 

Rigby,  R 

Riley,  R 

Robinson,  D 

Robinson,  E.  A 

Roper,  C.  F. 3 

Roper,  W.  F.  

Roy.  E.  D 


Sawyer.  O.  A. ^ 

Schonler,  A. 2 

Senn,  P.  L 1 

Shelters,  E.  E.  2 

Sherry,  J.  W 1 

Short,  C. 1 

Shuttleworth,  A.   C. 2 

Simms,  W. 1 

Smith,  E 2 

Smith,  II.  W 1 

Smith,  O. 10 

Snow,  I. 3 

Southwick,  W.  S 1 

Stafford,  A.  E 4 

Stimpson,  E.  S 47 

Stimpson,  W.  I.  10 

.Stone,  M.  L 6 

Storrs,  II.  A. 1 

Sntcliffe,  H.  II 1 

Syme,  D.  B 1 

Tichon,  J.  E 1 

Tomlinson,  H 2 

Tromblv,  W.  C.  1 

Tubby.  \V.  W 1 

Twiss.  \V.  A 1 

Yickerman.  J 1 


Ward.  X 1 


:o6 


Warren,  C.  H 2      Wilmarth,  T.  D. 

Welch,  W 1      Wolger,  J.  H. ... 

Whiting,  C.  D 1      Wood.  E.  S 

Whitmore,  F.  A.  2 

Wilkinson.   H 1 


1 

1 
10 


V\  hile  several  patents  are  figured  twice  as  belonging  to 
more  than  one  inventor,  our  interests  in  other  patents  not 
included  will  more  than  balance  them. 


SPEED    RECOMMENDED  FOR   DRAPER    LOOMS  FOB  MEDIUM 
WEIGHT  GOODS. 


There  is  no  reason  why  our  loom  cannot  run  at  any  speed 
attained  by  common  looms  of  the  same  capacity.  We  never 
advocate  extremes  in  this  direction.  In  fact,  on  heavy  goods 
we  would  consider  the  above  table  too  high. 


2"7 


ADDENDA. 


In  this  new  edition  we  print  the  following'  new  matter,  re- 
lating to  new  machines  and  new  processes  introduced  during  the 
last  year.  Much  of  it  has  already  been  featured  in  circular  form, 
but  we  reprint  in  order  to  have  our  loom  catalogue  as  compre- 
hensive as  possible. 


zo8 


THE  ROPER  HARNESS-MOTION. 


The  above  cut  illustrates  our  standard  E  Model  loom, 
equipped  with  our  new  harness-motion,  invented  by  Mr.  C.  F. 
Roper,  whose  name  has  been  continuously  associated  with  our 
loom  improvements.  The  illustration  also  shows  the  Bolton  loom 
seat,  and  our  new  outside  bearing  for  crank  shaft.  The  box  for 
emptv  bobbins  did  not  happen  to  be  on  the  loom  when 
the  photograph  was  taken.  This  Roper  harness-motion  is 
absolutelv  novel  in  principle,  embodying  many  marked  ad- 
vantages. As  applied,  it  will  weave  any  goods  from  two 
to  hve  harness,  and  it  will  weave  a  much  wider  range  than 
any  common  harness-motion  not  of  the  dobby  type.  It  was  de- 
signed for  use  with  our  steel-heddle  warp-stop,  and  i^  peculiar  in 


209 


having  no  cams  on  the  cam  shaft  within  the  frame,  no  bottom 
connection  to  the  harness  bar  or  frame,  and  no  straps  or  springs 
to  allow  back  lash.  The  operative  mechanism  is  all  outside  the 
loom  frame,  where  it  is  easily  adjusted  when  adjustments  are 
necessary.  Many  changes  in  shedding  can  be  made  by  simple 
hand  manipulation,  without  loosening  a  screw  or  turning  a  nut. 
If  necessary  to  change  the  cams,  they  are  easily  removed;  in 
fact,  there  is  no  other  harness  motion  in  existence  which  allows 
a  change  with  as  little  labor. 

We  have  run  these  motions  for  many  months  in  continuous 
operation,  and  did  not  offer  them  to  the  trade  until  they  had 
been  used  in  large  quantity  in  outside  mills,  where  they  have 
given  universal  satisfaction.  We  have  labored  for  years  to  get  a 
harness-motion  for  multiple-harness  weaving  that  would  enable 
us  to  use  our  steel  hecldle  in  this  field.  This  new  motion  seems 
well  adapted  for  both  fine  and  coarse  weaving.  The  heddles 
themselves  have  proved  to  be  practically  indestructible,  and 
their  automatic  spacing  saves  great  expense  in  harness  cost. 
Used  as  a  stop-motion,  this  harness  saves  extra  cost  in  drawing 
in,  especially  over  cotton  harness  looms  with  warp  stop-motions 
running  on  coarse  numbers,  where  the  beams  empty  rapidly. 

We  present  another  illustration  on  the  next  page,  showing 
more  of  detail.  The  main  operating  parts  are  in  full  color, 
with  the  rest  of  the  loom  in  lighter  shading.  The  motion  for 
the  harnesses  is  derived  from  a  cam  on"  the  end  of  the  lower 
shaft,  this  one  cam  serving  for  all  of  the  harnesses.  There  is  a 
small  shaft  with  selecting  cams,  as  noted,  which  governs  the 
timing  of  the  shedding  operations.  The  sequence  of  the  shades, 
however,  can  be  changed  by  hand  manipulation  of  the  compound 
levers,  within  a  certain  range.  Even  if  necessary  to  change  the 
selecting  cams,  it  is  evident  that  this  can  be  accomplished  with  a 
great  saving  of  time  over  the  former  necessity  of  removing  cams 
from  the  center  of  the  cam  shaft  within  the  frame  of  the  loom. 


DETAILS  OF  ROPER  HEAD. 


21  I 


OUR  "L"  MODEL  LOOM. 


While  we  have  had  excellent  success  with  the  broad  looms 
which  we  have  already  sold,  we  have  felt  that  improvement 
was  possible,  especially  in  view  of  certain  governing  conditions. 
It  seems  quite  important  that  a  broad  loom  intended  to  replace  old 
broad  looms,  should  have  the  same  floor  space,  and  in  this  new 
design  we  have  kept  within  the  conventional  limits.  We  are  to 
build  this  model  to  weave  cloth  from  72  to  10S   inches  in  width. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  we  drive  from  an  auxiliary  shaft. 
with  pulley  geared  to  run  at  higher  speed  than  the  crank  shaft, 
thereby  producing  great  ease  in  operation:  in  fact,  one  observer 
said  that  it  ran  as  easy  as  a  40  inch  loom.  We  drive  through  a 
clutch  pulley,  and  stop  with  a  band  brake,  to  which  we  call  es- 
pecial attention. 

The  pick  motion  on  a  broad  loom  requires  careful  study. 
We  have  made  a  long  line  of  experiments  on  our   rocker   motion 


21  2 


and  shuttle  box  design  with  this  end  in  view.  We  use  a  front 
binder  on  our  broad  looms  exclusively,  with  long  shuttle  box  and 
lengthened  shuttle.  When  weaving  two  beams,  we  use  a  com- 
pensating, compound  let-off.  Our  crank  shaft  is  of  great 
strength,  being  21-4  inches  in  diameter.  The  lay  and  reed  cap 
are  also  of  extra  strength.  We  are  using  a  new  warp  stop-mo- 
tion with  cotton  harness  for  this  loom,  having  a  new  indicating 
device  which  allows  the  weaver  to  readily  discover  the  broken 
warp  end.  Although  not  shown  in  the  cut,  we  shall  applv  our 
new  foot  shipper-motion,  which  is  an  auxiliary  shipper  near  the 
hopper  end  of  the  loom,  operated  by  the  foot  so  that  the  weaver 
may  stop  or  start  the  loom  from  the  hopper  end,  without  walk- 
ing over  to  the  shipper  end.  In  broad  loom  weaving,  this  saves 
appreciable  time.  We  also  now  applv  swinging  brackets  or  rests 
to  assist  in  handling  the  large  roll  of  cloth  when  removing  same 
from  the  loom. 

So   far  as   the   filling-changing   devices  are   concerned,  this 
loom  will  naturally  have  all  the  very  latest  mechanisms. 


We  quote  the  following  from    one   of  our  expert's  reports 
on  a  Northrop  loom  mill  : 

••In  the  year  1 ! t04  the  mill  ran  252  1-2  days  of  10  hours  each. 
'•On  800  looms  they  gave  out  261  new  shuttles." 

Another  report  on  another  mill  had  the  following: 

••Their  cost  of  supplies  for  the  four  weeks  ended  January  7th.  was 

$83.25  for  1292  (Northrop)  looms:  while  on  the  1174 looms  for 

the  same  period,  the  cosl  of  supplies  was  $301.71." 


213 


MILLING  LOOM  FRAMES. 


The  castings  which  arc  assembled  into  ordinary  machinery, 
arc  a  foundr)  product,  and  necessarily  vary  more  or  less  in  many 
important  details.  Difference  in  the*  heat  of  the  melted  metal. 
and  variation  in  the  rapidity  of  flow,  and  strains  of  cooling,  are 
hound  to  warp  and  twist  the  finished  product  more  or  less,  in 
spite  of  care.  If  we  add  to  these  reasons  the  differences  intro- 
duced by  old  foundry  practice,  in  hand  made  molds  with  uni- 
form patterns,  the  errors  are  necessarily  multiplied.  Our  own 
foundry  is  equipped  with  the  very  best  molding  machines:   in 


-'4 


tact,  they  represent  improvements  designed  in  our  own  shops, 

and  incorporated  in  trade  machines  through  special  arrange- 
ment. Our  castings  have  won  praise  wherever  they  have  gone, 
as  we  take  particular  pains  in  the  selection  and  combination  of 
different  grades  of  iron  to  secure  uniformity,  and  the  very  best 
possible  results  both  in  finish  and  adaptability  to  tool  work. 
They  are  as  good,  if  not   better,  than    any    made    elsewhere,    hut 

still,  they  are  not  good  enough. 

Following  the  general  American  custom,  we  have  built  our 
looms  for  years  by  assembling  the  frame  from  the  foundry 
castings,  without  machining  either  the  sides  or  girts.  In  our 
aim  to  perfect  our  loom  frame  beyond  the  general  practice  of 
loom  builders,  we  have  recently  introduced  a  full  line  of  modern 
machine  tools,  especially  designed  for  our  own  loom  products. 
Each  loom  that  we  now  send  out  has  the  sides  carefully  nulled 
where  other  parts  are  attached,  and  the  connecting  girts  are  also 
milled  to  absolute  uniformity  in  length.  The  cut  shows  one  of 
our  loom-side  milling  machines  in  operation.  There  are  so 
many  places  to  be  cut  that  a  considerable  variety  of  motions  is 
necessary.  The  machine  for  milling  the  girt  ends  is  naturally 
more  simple  in  detail.  Our  looms  now  approach  a  uniform 
standard  of  size  and  position  of  parts,  and  we  expect  that  they 
will  operate  with  uniformity  and  precision.  Repair  parts  will 
naturally  lit  closer,  and  the  whole  machine   has  been   raised   into 

a  higher  class  by  starting'  with  a  machined  frame. 

\\  e  do  not  expect  that  builders  of  common  looms  will 
follow  this  practice;  in  fact,  we  would  not  advise  them  to  do  so. 
Any  money  spent  in  the  further  perfection  of  the  common  loom 
is  practically  wasted,  for  the  present  common  loom  is  good 
enough  for  the  few  years  of  use  ahead  of  it. 


COP    SKEWERS. 

In  the  course  of  our  loom  experiments,  we 
keep  accurate  records  of  actual   happenings, 
and    very    possibly    determine    comparative 
||  values  in  a  way   not  often   attempted  in  out- 

side practice.  We  wish  to  give  our  cus- 
tomers the  benefit  of  any  knowledge  thus  ob- 
tained, and  therefore  call  attention  to  a  style 
of  cop  skewer  which  we  have  been  using  re- 
cently with  excellent  results.  The  cut  on 
the  left  shows  the  skewer  of  ordinary  form 
and  the  one  on  the  right  the  skewer  to  which 
we  have  reference.  The  difference  consists 
*-Li-»-n  jn  the  peculiar  wavv  line  on  the  exterior  of 
^i-j^l  the  spindle.  We  do  not  claim  that  this  ^ 
^3C^P>  shape  is  novel,  as  manv  mills  use  similar 
forms.  We  find  that  the  cop  waste  on  the  new  pattern  is  less 
than  one-quarter  of  that  with  the  regular  skewer.  We  have  to 
pay  a  slight  advance  for  this  extra  process,  but  shall  not  make 
any  difference  in  the  price  charged  to  customers.  We  have  also 
improved  our  skewers  by  adding  a  flat  band  to  the  head  below 
the  rings  to  prolong  wear. 


Referring  to  other  improvements  we  might  mention  that 
our  cop  hopper  now  has  a  neat  device  which  prevents  the  rota- 
tion of  the  lower  cop  skewer  in  the  hopper — a  fault  which  some- 
times causes  the  thread  to  wind  around  the  skewer  and  break 
when  the  transfer  of  H llin^f  is  made. 


2l6 


Our  shuttle-positioning  device  has  been  greatly  simplified, 
and  now  operates  with  less  strain  on  the  fork  and  slide. 

We  are  introducing  a  new  temple  thread-cutter,  in  which 
the  old  trouble  of  wear  on  the  roll  pin  is  entirely  obviated, 
for  the  roll  pin  is  no  longer  within  the  path  of  movement 
of  the  cutter,  even  after  wear  has  occurred.  The  temple  itself 
has  been  improved  considerably  in  detail  in  other  lines. 

Our  shuttle,  with  the  Jonas  Northrop  eve,  has  had  so  rapid 
a  success  as  to  seriously  embarass  our  manufacturing  depart- 
ment for  awhile.  We  find  this  eye  saves  materially  in  prevent- 
ing the  breakage  of  filling,  both  during  the  transfer  of  filling, 
and  later  while  the  filling  is  running  out.  We  have  made  slight 
changes  that  still  further  lessen  the  old  percentage  of  faults. 

In  our  warp  stop-motions,  we  have  introduced  changes  in 
position  and  arrangement  of  parts,  which  are  trivial  in  detail, 
but  accomplish  remarkable  results.  We  have  print  looms  in 
our  testing  room  that  run  for  weeks  with  an  average  of  about 
six  broken  warp  ends  per  day.  We  have  discovered  new 
-methods  of  manufacture  which  will  make  our  steel  heddles  start 
up  with  less  breakage  than  formerly.  We  have  always  told  cus- 
tomers that  steel  heddles  must  run  a  few  weeks  to  get  the  best 
results,  but  we  now  expect  them  to  start  off  like  old  heddles. 

In  our  single  thread  warp-stop  motion,  we  now  use  a  simple 
detector  mechanism,  by  which  the  weaver  can  easilv  find  just 
where  the  broken  thread  is,  an  improvement  that  will  be  wel- 
comed by  the  weavers. 

We  have  called  special  attention  to  our  Roper  head  harness 
motion.  We  have  another  form  for  multiple  harness  weaving, 
using  a  spring  top  of  very  simple  construction,  and  some  of  our 
customers  like  it  very  well.  We  had  some  trouble  at  the  start 
with  the  frequent  breaking  of  springs,  but  have  hardly  any 
trouble  whatever  in  this  line  since  we  have  adopted  a  wooden 
core  bar  in  the  springs. 


217 


Our  double  forks  started  off  with  records  which  made  us  de- 
cide to  recommend  them  on  every  loom  which  we  sent  out.  Cer- 
tain difficulties  became  apparent  after  the  looms  had  run  awhile. 
leading  to  the  invention  of  a  la}-  guide,  which  prevents  side  mo- 
tion of  the  lay  after  the  bearings  are  worn,  and  thus  preserves 
the  proper  co-operation  of  the  forks  with  the  grates.  This  lav 
guide  is  also  made  so  as  to  hold  the  lav  down  in  case  it  should 
tend  to  rise  from  any  cause.  While  this  change  is  very  simple, 
we  consider  it  of  great  importance.  We  have  also  found  it  pos- 
sible to  improve  the  double  fork  mechanism  itself,  and  secure 
much  better  results  by  using  a  different  construction  of  actu- 
ator in  connection  with  metal  projections  attached  to  the  lay, 
which  engage  any  trailing  thread  ami  prevent  the  false  opera- 
tion of  the  fork  by  a  trailing  thread.  This  eliminates  thin 
places,  and  seems  to  make  the  whole  construction  absolute- 
ly reliable. 

Our  light  J  Model  loom  is  undergoing  considerable  change 
in  construction:  for  while  it  is  making  excellent  records,  as  first 
sent  out,  we  believe  we  have  noted  several  chances  for  improve- 
ment. We  intend  to  make  this  the  best  two-harness  loom  ever 
built,  and  by  confining  it  to  two-harness  work,  we  believe  we 
can  meet  the  demand  for  that  class  of  weaving  to  better  advan- 
tage than  by  selling  a  loom  which  covers  a  wider  range. 

In  our  general  loom  construction,  we  have  adopted  an  out- 
side bearing  for  the  crank  shaft,  which  will  make  a  smoother 
running  loom  and  practically  eliminate  crank  shaft  breakage,  a 
serious  trouble  with  any  make  of  loom. 

Mr.  Roper's  let-off  has  been  improved  by  the  application  of 
a  hand  ratchet  mechanism,  allowing  instant  and  easy  loosening 
of  the  warp,  with  quick  increase  of  tension  when  desired. 

Our  cut  motion  has  been  improved  by  the  additionof  special 
gears  which  mesh  into  teeth  cut  in  the  cloth  roll  core  bar,  so 
that  thev  ensure  the  rotation  of  this   core    bar   when  the   cloth    is 


2l8 


first  being  wound.     As  the  cloth  winds,  this  core  bar  gradually 

draws  away  so  that  the  teeth  are  not  in  mesh  after  the  cloth  is 
fairly  started.  In  rocker  motions,  we  have  improved  the  Stearns 
by  downhold  lugs,  and  we  have  also  given   careful  study  to   the 

old  '"nigger  loot"  motion,  so  called,  evolving  a  pattern  which 
seems  to  give  a  most  accurate  throw  for  the  shuttle. 


PICKER    CHECKS. 


During  the  last  year  or  so,  there  have  been  quite  a  few  loom 
picker-check  i mentions  exploited,  some  of  which  were  applied 
to  Northrop  looms,  with  the  claim  that  their  running  was 
thereby  improved.  Some  of  these  checks  involved  the  principle 
of  bringing  extra  pressure  on  the  shuttle  in  the  shuttle  box. 
With  our  Northrop    loom    construction,    it   is    necessary    for    the 


2I9 


shuttle  to  move  slightly  at  times,  when  the  bobbin  is  trans- 
ferred. The  shuttle,  of  course,  does  not  reach  the  same  position 
every  time,  and  it"  it  goes  by  the  hopper  too  far,  it  must  slip 
forward  somewhat  when  the  incoming  bobbin  presses  on  the 
shuttle  incline.  If  the  shuttle  is  locked  by  extra  friction  at  this 
time,  it  brings  considerable  extra  strain  on  the  mechanism. 

The  check  which  we  have  used  for  the  ten  years  of  our 
loom  introduction  has  seemed  to  meet  the  conditions  of  usual 
service,  but  we  have  always  recognized  that  it  introduced  a  con- 
siderable element  of  expense,  the  leather  wearing  continuously. 
W  e  therefore  spent  over  six  months  experimenting  with  every 
form  of  shuttle  check  and  picker-check  that  our  various  inven- 
tors could  devise,  together  with  all  the  checks  sent  us  by  outside 
inventors,  or  submitted  to  us  for  trial.  We  will  not  stretch  the 
credulity  of  our  readers  by  telling  them  the  exact  number  of  de- 
vices so  tested.  Suffice  to  say,  that  out  of  the  trial,  we  selected 
a  form  which  was  unquestionably  superior  to  all  the  rest,  so  far 
as  the  actual  results  were  concerned.  When  we  speak  of  re- 
sults, we  mean  that  this  check  kept  the  loom  running  more  con- 
tinuously, and  had  a  better  record  as  to  breakage  of  cops  while 
weaving,  cop  weaving  being  peculiarly  adapted  to  test  the 
cushioning  effect  of  check   devices. 

The  excessive  wear  on  our  early  form  of  check,  was  due  to 
the  harsh  blow  of  the  stick  in  its  forward  movement.  With  the 
present  check,  no  such  impact  occurs,  the  return  to  place  being 
effected  by  a  simple  spring  (c).  The  picker  when  engaged  by 
the  shuttle,  moves  the  stick,  necessitating  the  moving  of  the 
leather  strap  through  a  short  space.  This  motion  of  the  stick 
acts  upon  a  pivoted  lever  (a),  which  by  its  movement  brings 
pressure  against  the  arm  (b)  against  the  strap  to  still  further 
retard  its  motion.  The  resistance  is  therefore  graduated,  and 
the  principle  seems  correct  for  the  results  are  certainly  su- 
perior.     The  leather  in   this  check    is   less  expensive,  and  wears 


220 


much  longer  than  the  -trap  in  our  old  check.  We  have  sent 
this  new  form  out  on  several  thousand  looms,  and  it  is  giving 
£ood  satisfaction. 


LOOM  TESTS. 

Outside  critic-  have  sometimes  referred  to  the  tests  made 
in  our  private  weaving  department  as  having  little  or  no  value 
for  comparative  purposes,  because  we  are  supposedly  using  bet- 
ter yarn  and  more  perfect  conditions  than  are  attainable  in 
the  average  weave  room.  We  wish  to  correct  this  impression. 
by  explaining  that  the  warp  and  filling  yarn  which  we  use 
is  not  especially  prepared  for  us  in  any  way,  but  is  bought  in 
open  market  from  various  mills,  and  we  are  confident  that  if  the 
same  yarn  were  made  in  a  mill  which  we  could  control,  we 
should  insist  on  better  quality  and  more  uniformity.  Our  weave 
room  is  merely  a  space  partitioned  off  in  our  wooden  setting-up 
room,  and  while  we  endeavor  to  secure  proper  atmospheric  con- 
ditions, v\  e  know  that  we  do  not  secure  as  good  conditions  as  we 
should  in  a  weaving  room  designed  for  that  purpose  alone.  We 
see  no  reason  why  our  records  should  not  be  bettered  in  the 
average  mill  where  our  loom- are  run.  The  one  advantage  that 
we  d<>  obtain  i-  that  of  having  sufficient  extra  men  so  that 
careful  note  may  be  made  of  every  error  in  operation  that  does 
occur. 


A  NEW  METHOD   OF  FILLING    HOP- 
PERS ON  NORTHROP  LOOMS. 

In  the  early  days  of  our  loom  introduction,  we  were  told  by 
many  mill  officials,  that  the  records  which  we  were  making  in 
our  own  experimental  room  would  be  easily  beaten  after  the 
mills  had  taken  the  looms  under  their  own  charge.  This  we 
were  perfectly  willing  to  concede,  and  results  have  proyed 
that  those  who  use  the  looms  will  discover  many  latent  possi- 
bilities. We  found  last  year  that  one  mill  was  adopting  a 
method  of  filling  hoppers  in  which  the  weavers  took  a  whole 
handful  of  bobbins  from  the  filling  box  atone  time,  freeing  the 
ends  of  filling  from  the  bobbins  with  the  other  hand,  winding 
off  sufficient  yarn,  and  then  slipping  all  the  bobbins  into  the 
hopper  at  one  operation.  This  is  made  easy  by  the  use  of  our 
latest  hopper  construction,  haying  the  new  spring  discs.  Our 
investigator  timed  some  of  these  weavers,  and  found  they  could 
put  24  bobbins  into  a  hopper  in  a  minute  and  a  half  to  two 
minutes.  The  speed  is  facilitated,  of  course,  by  having  the  ends 
of  filling  left  in  proper  position  when  doffing  at  the  spinning 
frame.  We  estimate  the  time  required  to  fill  a  hopper  by  the 
ordinary,  single-bobbin  method,  at  about  three  minutes. 

The  practical  advantages  of  the  system  were  shown  by  the 
results  being  obtained.  The  weavers  were  all  running  20  looms 
on  ticking,  with  no  help.  With  common  looms  on  similar 
goods,  they  run  from  4  to  6  looms  in  the  same  mill,  paying  32 
cents  per  cut  against  11  1-2  cents  on  the  Northrop.  The  Nor- 
throp looms  were  also  giving  more  production  and  better  cloth, 
with  less  cost  for  repairs :  in  fact,  the  entire  repairs,  including 
shuttles,  were  not  costing  over  3  cents  per  loom  per  week. 
The  matter  struck  us  as  having  sufficient  importance   so  that   we 


not  only  advised  all  our  customers  carefully  about  the  advantages 
of  the  system,  but  we  have  hired  expert  weavers  who  understand 
the  system,  to  teach  weavers  in  various  mills  how  to  utilize  the 
new  idea.  We  naturally  find  more  or  less  opposition  from  those 
who  are  set  in  their  ways,  and  we  also  have  found  that  other 
mills  have  made  improvements  of  their  own  over  the  common 
system,  some  of  the  substitute  plans  having'  considerable  merit. 
A  system  which  accustoms  the  weaver  to  placing  several 
bobbins  in  the  hopper  at  a  time  has  another  advantage,  in  that  it 
uses  up  less  of  the  weaver's  energy  in  walking  back  and  forth 
from  loom  to  loom.  Weavers  are  frequently  seen  putting  bob- 
bins in  hoppers  when  there  are  only  one  or  two  gone.  They 
should  economize  their  effort  by  learning  to  wait  until  a  large 
number  of  bobbins  can  be  put  into  the  hopper  all  at  once.  This 
latter  system  will  allow  them  to  tend  many  more  looms  with  no 
increase  of  effort.  It  is  the  walking  around  that  tires  the 
weaver,  and  they  take  a  great  many  unnecessary  steps  in 
common  practice. 


ARRANGE3IENT  OF  LOOMS. 

Our  Mr.  C.  H.  Draper  has  given  considerable  study  to  the 
problem  of  arranging  Northrop  looms  so  that  the  weaver  shall 
operate  them  with  the  least  possible  exertion.  A  great  deal  of 
a  weaver's  time  and  energv  is  taken  in  the  moving  from  one 
loom  to  another.  The  usual  weaver  plans  to  get  to  every  loom 
as  it  is  stopped,  so  as  to  start  it  up  at  soon  as  possible,  attending 


223 


to  the  duties  of  taking  off  cloth  and  putting  bobbins  in  the  hop- 
per while  all  the  looms  are  running.  The  problem  was  figured 
by  taking  the  average  distance  a  weaver  would  be  obliged  to  go, 
by  adding  the  distances  from  each  loom  to  every  other  loom, 
and  dividing  by  the  product  of  the  number  of  looms,  multiplied 
by  the  number  of  looms  minus  one.  On  the  single-alley  system, 
the  average  distance  for  16  print  looms  figured  19.23  feet.  On  a 
double-alley  system,  16  looms,  the  average  distance  figured  1^.82 
feet,  a  saying  of  17.7  per  cent.  With  24  looms  the  saying  of 
the  double  alley  system  is  even  greater,  the  average  distance 
with  single-alley  being  -9.52  and  with  double  alley  21.19,  or 
2S.2  per  cent,  saving.  With  a  single-alley  system,  the  average 
distance  between  looms  increases  directly  as  the  number  of 
looms;  but  with  the  double-alley  system,  while  the  looms  are 
increased  50  per  cent.,  the  average  distance  from  loom  to  loom 
is  increased  something  like  35  per  cent.,  showing  it  is  easier  for 
a  weaver  to  run  a  given  number  of  additional  looms  than  it  is  to 
run  an  equal  number  of  original  looms.  The  two-alley  system 
also  allows  the  weaver  to  move  in  a  circular  path  while  filling 
flatteries,  and  thus  to  be  always  approaching  the  batteries  which 
need  attention  the  most:  whereas,  in  the  single-alley  system, 
when  the  weaver  reaches  the  end  of  an  alley,  the  loom  needing 
attention  is  at  the  other  end. 

The  problem  was  also  considered  in  relation  to  arranging  24 
looms  in  three  alleys,  eight  to  the  alley.  The  average  distance 
is  practically  the  same  as  with  two  alleys,  but  there  are  disadvan- 
tages in  having  three  separate  alleys  to  move  around  in.  With 
more  than  24  looms  there  might  be  advantages  in  the  three-alley 
system,  but  so  far  as  our  present  experience  goes,  we  are  not 
prepared  to  give  a  definite  recommendation.  We  do  unhesitat- 
ingly recommend  the  two-alley  system  between  the  limits  of  12 
to  24  looms  to  the  weaver. 


224 


SALES. 

Although  we  print  a  complete  record  of  sales  to  the  nearest 
possible  date,  a  casual  reading  of  the  same  will  hardly  give 
the  information  which  the  facts  warrant.  Sales  of  improved 
machinery  really  prove  nothing  until  the  machines  themselves 
have  demonstrated  their  capacity.     The  real   proof   of  merit  is 

shown  when    the    original   trials   produce   further 

orders.  The  greater  part  of  the  Northrop  looms  sold  have 
been  on  repeat  orders,  or  from  parties  who  had  carefully  inves- 
tigated the  actual  running  of  the  looms  in  others'  mills. 

We  first  began  to  ship  looms  from  our  plant  in  1S95.  It 
may  be  interesting  to  go  back  and  examine  the  results  attained 
from  the  very  first  looms  that  we  sent  out. 

Taking  this  first  year  to  1S96,  we  find  that  we  then 
sold  the  Tucapau  Mills  320  looms.  They  have  since 
bought  1439  more,  total 1  759 

We  sold  the  Queen  City  Cotton  Company  792  looms, 
and  they  have  since  bought  600  more,  total x392 

Our  next  order  was  from  the  Pacific  Mills.  100 
looms.      They  have  since  bought  20SS  more,  total 21SS 

The  Merrimack  order  for  100  looms  was  entered 
about  the  same  time.  They  have  recently  wanted  204S 
more  for  their  mills  both  North  and  South,  total 214S 

The  Amory  Mfg.  Co.  ordered  100  looms.  They 
have  since  increased,  making  a  total  of 6S8 

The  Lawrence  Company  took  216  looms.  The  mill 
in  which  they  were  running  was  bought  entire  by  the 
Tremont  &  Suffolk  Company,  who  afterward  bought 
1  760  more,  total J9/6 


The  Grosvenor  Dale  Company  placed  an  early  order 
for  335  looms.  They  kept  ordering  and  ordering  at  vari- 
ous times;  3282  more  in  all,  total S^11/ 

The  Social  Company  had  196  looms  to  start  with  : 
other  orders  increase  to  a  total  of     ^^6 

Every  Olie  of  our  first   eight   customers   has   therefore   not 

only  increased  their  orders,  but  increased  largely.  They  would 
hardly  continue  their  patronage  had  the  looms  not  proved 
profitable. 

And  we  had  other  customers  at  this  early  period,  who  have 
since  continued  their  patronage.      For  instance: 

First  Order.  Total   Orders. 

The  Pelzer  Company 1000  looms.  -^\s-2  looms. 

Gaffney  Mfg.  Co 1040  ••  1401 

Massachusetts  Cotton  Mills 100  »  (both  mills)    2833 

Lonsdale  Company 12  "  2095 

Newmarket  Mfg.  Co 100  "  371 

Spartan  Mills    1280  "  1880 

Dwight  Mfg.  Co. 16  "  681 

We  could,  of  course,  add  largely  to  this  list,  if  we  referred 
to  more  recent  examples.  We  believe  those  quoted,  however, 
are  more  pertinent,  as  it  was  from  the  results  of  our  earliest 
looms  that  these  proofs  of  satisfaction  were  derived.  We  build 
better  looms  to-day  :  their  use  would  give  still  better  satisfac- 
tion. 

It  may  be  noted  that  the  mills  quoted  coyer  several  states, 
both  North  and  South.  They  also  cover  a  wide  variety  in  goods. 
Their  reputation  is  unquestioned.  Their  example  is  certainly 
worthy  of  consideration. 

The  Northrop  loom  has  won  recognition  outside  of  the 
United  States  in  spite  of  the  difficulties  of  foreign  introduction. 
The  British  Northrop  Loom  Company  Limited  has  been  estab- 


-6 


lished  to  handle  a  certain  division  of  Foreign  trade.  The  Soci- 
ete  Alsacienne  de  Constructions  Mechaniques,  of  Mulhouse, 
Germany,  and  Belfort,  France,  build  continuously  at  both  of 
their  establishments.  The  Ateliers  tie  Construction  Ruti.  of 
Ruti.  Switzerland,  are  manufacturing  on  various  foreign  orders 
for  Switzerland.  Italy,  etc..  and  the  firm  of  Isaac  Mautner  cc 
Sons  of  Vienna  manufacture  for  Austria  and  Hungary. 

We  have  sent  looms  from  our  own  works  to  Canada.  Eng- 
land.  Mexico.   Holland.  Russia.  Japan  and  elsewhere. 


LIST  OF  NORTHROP  LOOMS  SOLD  IN 

THE    UNITED  STATES    TO 

JULY  i,  i9o5. 

NAME.  PLACE.  QJJANTITY. 

Abbeville  Cotton  Mills  Abbeville.   S.    C.  940 

Acushnet  Mill   Corp.  New  Bedford.  Mass.  417 

Adams   Mfg.  Co.  North  Scituate,   R.  I.  24 

Aiken  Mfg.  Co.  Bath.  S.  C.  3H 

American  Linen  Company  Fall  River.  Mass.  100 

American  Textile  Company  Cartersville.  Ga.  674 

American  Spinning  Company  Greenville.  S.  C.  758 

Amorv  Mfg.   Company  Manchester.  X.   H.  6SS 

Amoskeag  Mfg.   Company  Manchester.  X.   H.  1361 

Anderson  Cotton  Mills  Anderson.  S.  C.  724 

Androscoggin  Mills  Lewiston.  Maine  204 


'■-7 


NAME. 

Appleton  Company 
Aragon  Mills 
Arcadia  Mills 
Asheville  Cotton  Mills 
Ashland  Company 
Atlantic  Cotton  Mills 
Atlas  Linen  Company 
Attawaugan  Mills 
Augusta  Factory 
Aurora   Cotton   Mills 


PLACE.                    HI' 

A.NTITY. 

Lowell.  Mass. 

5*4 

Aragon,  Ga. 

IO 

Spartanburg,  S.  C. 

344 

Asheville.  X.  C. 

IO 

Ashland,  H.I. 

20 

Lawrence.  Mass. 

337 

Meredith.  X.   H. 

25 

Killingly,  Conn. 

48 

Augusta,  Ga. 

3- 

Aurora.  111. 

96 

L.  Bachmann  &  Company  Uxbridge,  Mass. 

Barker  Cotton  Mills  Company  Mobile,    Ala. 

Barker  Mills  Auburn,  Maine 

Bates  Mfg.  Company  Lewiston.   Maine 

Beaumont  Mfg.  Company  ......  Spartanburg,  S.  C. 


Belton.  S.  C. 
New  Bedford.  Mass. 
Berkeley,  R.  I. 
Blackstone.  Mass. 
Lowell.  Mass. 


Belton  Mills 

Bennett  Spinning  Company 

Berkeley  Company 

Blackstone  Mfg.    Company 

Boott  Mills 

Borden  Mfg.  Co.,  Richard  Fall  River,  Mass. 

Botany  Worsted  Mills  Passaic.  X.  J. 

Bonnie  Mills  Fall  River.  Mass. 

Bradford  Dnrfee  Textile  School     Fall  River,  Mass. 
Brandon  Mills 


Bristol  Mfg.  Corp. 
Brogon  Cotton  Mills 
Brookside  Mills 
Brookford  Mills 
Brower  <$:  Love  Bros. 
Cabarrus  Cotton  Mills 


Greenville.  S.  C. 
New  Bedford.  Mass. 
Anderson,  S.  C. 
Knoxville.  Tenn. 
Brookford.  N.  C. 
Indianapolis.    Ind. 
Concord,  X.   C. 


325 

16 


1 240 

1 

256 

r  03  2 

"3- 

652 

'4 
2000 

5 

99- 
1 

366 

650 
20 

5  1- 


223 


NAME. 

Cabot  Mfg.  Company 
Cannon  Mfg.  Company 
Capital  City  Mills 
Carolina  Mills 
Centreyille  Cotton  Mills 
Chadwick  Mfg.  Co. 
Chewalla  Cotton  Mills 
Chicopee  Mfg.  Company 
Chicora  Cotton  Mill- 
China  Mfg.  Company 

Chiquola  Mfg.  Company 
Clemson  College 
Clifton  Mfg.  Company 

Cocheco  Mfg.  Co.    

Columbia  Mfg.  Co. 
Columbian  Mfg.   Co. 
Columbus  Mfg.  Co. 
Continental  Mills 
Converse  Co..  D.  E. 
Cooleemee  Cotton  Mills   . 
Cordis  Mills 
Coventry  Company 
Crompton  Company 


PLACE.  QUANTITY. 

Brunswick,  Maine   204 

Concord.  X.  C.  426 

Columbia.  S.  C.  216 

Greenville,  S.  C.  160 

Centreyille.  R.  I.  .....  16 

Charlotte.  N.  C.  300 

Eufaula,  Ala.  40 

Chicopee  Falls.  Mass.  126 

Rock  Hill.  S.  C.  1 

Suncook.  X.  II.  89 

Honea  Path.  S.  C.  1000 

Calhoun  Station.  S.  C.  2 

Clifton.  S.  C. 1000 

Dover,  X.  H. 116 

Ramseur,  X.  C.  69 

Greenville,  X.  H 80 

Columbus,  Ga.       Soo 

Lewiston,  Maine  121 

Glendale,  S.   C.  5^0 

Cooleemee.  X.  C.  1296 

Millbury,  Mass.  61 

Providence,  R.  I.  2 

Crompton.  R.  I.  2 


Dallas  Mfg.  Company 
Darlington  Mfg.  Company 
Dunbarton  Flax  Spinning  Co. 
Durham  Cotton  Mfg.  Co 
Dwight  Mfg.  Co. 


Huntsville,  Ala. 
Darlington,  S.  C. 
Greenwich,  X.  V. 
West  Durham.  X.  C. 
Chicopee.  Mass. 


s95 

59- 
1 

300 

6S1 


Eagle  &  Phenix  Mills 
Eagle  Mills 


Columbus,  Ga. 
Wi  lonsocket,  R.I. 


328 

S 


Hi) 


NAME.  PLACE.  QJJANTITY. 

Easley  Cotton  Mills  Easley,  S.  C.  iooo 

Eastman  Cotton  Mills  Eastman,  Ga.  150 

Edwards  Mfg.  Company     Augusta,  Maine  709 

Erwin  Cotton  Mills  West  Durham.  N.  C.  1901 

Eufaula  Cotton  Mills  Eufaula,  Ala.  32 

Everett  Mills  Lawrence,  Mass.  660 

Exeter  Mfg.  Company  Exeter,  N.  H.       100 

Exposition  Cotton  Mills  Atlanta,  Ga.  350 

Fairfield  Cotton  Mills  Winnsboro,  S.    C.  190 

Fall  River  Loom   Fixers'  Ass'n     Fall   River,  Mass.  2 

Falls  Company  Norwich,  Conn.  61 

Farnum  &  Co.,  John  Lancaster,   Pa.  12 

Farwell  Mills  Lisbon,  Maine  132 

Firth.  William  Boston,  Mass.  1 

Florence  Mills  Forest  City,  X.  C.  200 

Fulton  Bag  &  Cotton  Mills  Atlanta.  Ga.  1088 

Gaffney  Mfg.  Company  Gaffney,  S.  C.  1401 

Gainesville  Cotton  Mills  Gainesville,  Ga.  ...     1000 

Gary  &  Sons.  James  S.  Baltimore,  Md.  3 

Georgia  School  of  Technology     Atlanta.  Ga.  6 

Gibson  Mfg.  Company    ...  Concord.  X.  C.  6 

Glenn-Lowry  Mfg.  Co.  Whitmire.  S.  C.  873 

(den  Raven  Cotton  Mills  Burlington,  X.  C.  100 

Glenwood  Cotton  Mills  Easley,  S.   C.  96 

Gosnold  Mills  Corp New  Bedford.  Mass.  800 

Granby  Cotton  Mills  Columbia.  S.  C.  1014 

Granitevillc  Mfg.  Co.  Yaucluse,  S.  C.  362 

Graniteville  Mfg.  Co.  Graniteville.  S.  C.  592 

Great  Falls  Mfg.  Co.  Somersworth,  X.  II.  638 

Great  Falls  Mfg.  Co..  Rockingham.  X.   C.  172 


NAME. 

Grendell  Mills 
Grinnell  Mfg.  Corp. 
Grosvenor-Dale  Company 


PLACE.  QJJANTITY. 

Greenwood.  S.  C.  49S 

New  Bedford.  Mass.  341 

Xo.  Grosvenor-Dale,  Ct     36 1 7 


Hamilton  Mfg.  Company 

Hamlet  Textile  Company 
Harmony  Grove  Mills 
Hartsville  Cotton  Mills 
Hathaway  Mfg.  Company 
Henderson  Cotton  Mills 
Henrietta  Mills 
Hill  Mfg.   Co. 
Home  Cotton  Mills 
Hope  Co..  Phoenix  Mill 
Hoskins  Mills 


Lowell.  Mass. 

192 

Woonsocket.  R.  I. 

^6 

Harmony  Grove,  Ga. 

396 

Hartsville,  S.  C. 

6^0 

New  Bedford.  Mass. 

401 

Henderson,  X.  C. 

84 

Henrietta.  X.  C. 

IOI 

Lewiston.  Maine 

r4- 

St.  Louis.  M( <. 

78 

Hope.  R.  I. 

Soo 

Charlotte.  X.  C. 

sSo 

Indian  Head  Mi!!-         Alabama     Cordova,  Ala. 


Jackson  Company 
Jackson   Fibre  C    . 
Johnson  <S:  Johnson 

Keasbey  &  Mattison  Co. 

Kesler  Mfg.  Co. 

King  Mfg.  Co..  John  P. 

King  Philip  Mills 


Nashua,  X.  H.  441 

Jackson.  Tenn.  1592 

Xew  Brunswick,  X.J. 3S7 

Ambler,  Pa.  5 

Salisbury,  X.  C.  268 

Augusta,  Ga.  1600 

Fall  River,  Mass.  14 


Lancaster  Mills 

Lane  Mills 

Lanett  Cotton  Mills 

Laurens  Cotton  Mills 

Lawrence  Duck  Company 


Clinton.  Mass. 

41S 

Xew  Orleans,  La. 

5J4 

West  Point.  Ga. 

690 

Laurens,  S.  C. 

5-- 

Lawrence.  Mass. 

2 

NAME.  PLACE.  QUANTITY. 

Lawrence  Loom  Fixers'  Assn.  Lawrence.  Mass.  i 

Limestone  Mills  Gaffney,  S.  C.  350 

Lockhart  Mills  Lockhart,  S.  C.  800 

Lockwood  Company  Waterville,  Maine  1427 

Lonsdale  Company  Lonsdale,  R.   I.  -°95 

Loray  Mills  Gastonia,  X.  C.  1660 

Lorraine  Mfg.  Co.  Saylesville,  R.  I.  3 

Louise  Mills  Charlotte.  N.  C.  152 

Lowell  Textile  School  Lowell,  Mass.  3 

Lynchburg  Cotton  Mills  Lynchburg.  Va.  1 

Maginnis  Cotton  Mills  New  Orleans.  La.  200 

Manchester  Mills  Manchester.  X.   11.  681 

Manville  Co.  (Social  Mill)  Woonsocket,  R.  I.  596 

Massachusetts  Cotton  Mills  Lowell,  Mass.  493 

Massachusetts  Mills  in  Georgia  Lindale.  Ga.  234° 

Mass.  Institute  of  Technology  Boston,  Mass 2 

May's  Landing  W.  Power  Co.  May's  Landing.  X.  J.  3 

Meridian  Cotton  Mills Meridian,  Miss.  148 

Merrimack  Mfg.  Company  Lowell.  Mass.  430 

Merrimack  Mfg.  Company  Huntsville,  Ala.  171S 

Methuen  Company  Methuen,  Mass.  26 

Mills  Mfg.  Company  Greenville,  S.  C.  560 

Millville  Mfg.    Company  Millville,  X.  J.  313 

Mississippi  Agr'l  College  Agr'l  College.  Mis-.  2 

Mississippi  Mills  Wesson,  Miss.  49 

Mollohon  Mfg.  Co.  Newberry.  S.    C.  352 

Monaghan  Mills  Greenville,  S.  C.  1262 

Monarch  Cotton   Mills  Union,  S.  C.  980 

Nantucket  Mills                        .  Spray,  X.  C.  32 

Nashua  Mfg.  Company  Nashua.  N.  II.  374 


232 


NAME.  PLACE.  QUANTITY. 

Naumkeag  Steam  Cotton  Co.  Salem,   Mass.  257 

Neuse  River  Mills  Raleigh,  N.  C.  150 

New  Bedford  Textile  School. ....  New  Bedford,  Mass.  2 

Newberry  Cotton  Mills  Newberry,  S.   C.  26 

Newmarket  Mfg.  Co.  Newmarket,  N.  H.  371 

New  York  Mills  New  York  Mills,  N.  Y.         72 

Nightingale  Mills                  Putnam,  Conn.  .  14 

Ninety  Six  Cotton  Mills  Ninety  Six,  S.  C.  316 

Nockege  Mills.  Fitchburg,  Mass.  13 

Nokomis  Cotton  Mills  Lexington,  X.  C.  356 

N.C.Col.of  Agr'l&Mech.Arts  West  Raleigh,  N.  C.  ...            3 

Odell  Mfg.  Company  Concord,  N.  C.  40 

Olympia  Cotton  Mills  Columbia,  S.  C.  ......  2250 

Orangeburg  Mfg.  Co.  Orangeburg,  S.  C.  392 

Orr  Cotton  Mills                         ....  Anderson,  S.  C.  .  15°-\ 

Ossipee  Cotton  Mills  Elon  College,  N.  C.  16S 

Pacific  Mills  Lawrence,  Mass. 2iS7 

Pacolet  Mfg.  Co.  Pacolet,  S.  C.  222 

Pacolet  Mfg.  Co.  Gainesville,  Ga.  J7^4 

Palmer  Mills  Three  Rivers,  Mass.  88 

Palmetto  Cotton  Mills  Palmetto,  Ga.  So 

Parkhill  Mfg.  Co.  Fitchburg,  Mass.  13 

Patterson,  S.  F.  llchester,  Md.  1 

Peabodv  Mills  Newburyport,  Mass.  16 

Pell  City  Mfg.  Co Pell  City,  Ala.  720 

Pelzer  Mfg.  Co.  Pelzer,  S.  C.  26S2 

Pemberton  Company                ...  Lawrence,  Mass.  51 

Pequot  Worsted  Co.  Danielson,  Conn.  20 

Pepperell  Mfg.  Co.  ...  Biddeford,  Maine  1366 

Philadelphia  Textile  School Philadelphia,  Pa.  2 


2X 


NAME. 

Piedmont  Mfg.  Co. 
Pocasset  Mfg.  Co. 
Poe  Mfg.  Co.,  F.  W. 

Portland  Silk  Co. 
Potomska  Mills  Corp. 
Putnam  Mfg.  Co. 


PLACE.                      QU 

win  v. 

Piedmont,  S.  C. 

640 

Fall  River.  Mass. 

48 

Greenville,  S.  C. 

1 1 

Middletown,  Conn. 

1 

New  Bedford,  Mass. 

2 

Putnam,  Conn. 

2C2 

Queen  City  Cotton  Co. 
Quidnick  Mfg.  Co. 
Quinebaug  Company 


Burlington,   Vt.  .   1392 

Quidnick.  R.  I.  17 

Danielson,  Conn.  206 


Reedy  River  Mfg.  Co.  Greenville,  S.  C. 

Revolution  Cotton  Mills  Greensboro.  X.  C. 

Rhode  Island  School  of  Design     Providence,  R.  I. 


Riverside  Cotton  Mills 
Roanoke  Mills  Company 
Rosemary  Mfg.  Co. 
Royal  Bag  &  Yarn  Mfg.  Co. 
Royal  Cotton  Mills 


Danville,  Va. 
Roanoke  Rapids,  X.  C. 
Roanoke  Rapids,  N.  C. 
Charleston.  S.  C. 
Wake  Forest.  X.  C. 


153 

80S 

r 

1 

1  20 

268 

74 

I  So 


Salmon  Falls  Mfg.  Co. 
Salt's  Textile  Mfg.  Co. 
Samoset  Company 
Saxon  Mills 
Scottdale  Mills 
Shetucket  Company 
Slater  Cotton  Co. 
Slater  Mills,  H.  X. 
Spartan  Mills 
Star  &  Crescent  Mills 
Stark  Mills 


Salmon  Falls.  X.  II. 
Bridgeport,  Conn. 
Valley  Falls,  R.  I. 
Spartanburg,  S.  C. 
Atlanta,  da. 
Xorwich.  Conn. 
Pawtucket,  R.  I. 
Webster.    Mas--. 
Spartanburg,  S.  C.  [880 


Philadelphia.  Pa. 
Manchester.  X.    II. 


•9 

So 

320 

35° 
70 

j;  1 


44 


234 


NAME.  PLACE.  QUANTITY. 

Steele's  Mills  Rockingham,  X.   C.  600 

Stevens  Mfg.  Co.  Fall  River,  Mass  1 

Stirling  Silk  Mfg.  Co.  Stirling,  N.  J.  2 

Strickland  Cotton  Mills  Valdosta,  Ga.  20 

Susquehanna  Silk  Mills  Sunbury,  Pa.  2 

Tarboro  Cotton  Factory  Tarboro,  N.  C.  200 

Texas  Mechanical  College  College  Station,  Tex.  2 

Thistle  Mill  Co.  Ilchester,  Md.  4 

Thomaston  Cotton  Mills  Thomaston,  Ga.  50 

Thompson  &  Co.,  Jas.  Valley  Falls,  N.  Y.  . .  12 

Thorndike  Company  Thorndike,  Mass.  2 

Toxaway  Mills  Anderson,  S.  C.  352 

Tremont  &  Suffolk  Mills  Lowell,  Mass.  1976 

Trion  Mfg.  Co.  Trion  Factorv,  Ga.  664 

Tucapau  Mills                          Tucapau,  S.  C. ...  1759 

United  States  Bunting  Co.  Lowell,  Mass.  2 
United  States  Cotton  Co.  Central  Falls,  R.  I.           .    1600 
Utica  Cotton  Co.  Capron,  X.  Y.  1 
Utica   Steam   &    Mohawk   Val- 
ley Cotton  Mills  Utica,  X.  Y.  14 


Vermont  Mills 
Victor  Mfg.  Co. 

Wachusett  Mills 
Walhalla  Cotton  Mills 
Wamsutta  Mills 
Warren  Cotton  Mills 
Warren  Mfe.  Co. 


Bessemer  City,  X.  C. 

96 

Greers,  S.  C. 

1309 

Worcester,  Mass. 

1 

Walhalla.  S.  C. 

1  20 

Xew  Bedford,  Mass. 

200 

West  Warren,  Mass 

64 

Warrenville,  S.  C. 

1000 

235 


NAME.  PLACE.  QUANTITY. 

White  &  Sons.  \.  D.  Winchendou  Sp'gs,Mass.         i 

Whitman  Mills  New  Bedford,  Mass.  829 

Whitney  Mfg.  Co.  Whitney.  S.   C.  626 

Whittenton  Mfg.  Co.  Taunton,   Mass.  I 

Williamson.  Jas.  N.  &  W.  H.  Raleigh,  N.  C.  150 

Wilmington  Cotton  Mills  Wilmington.  N.  C 60 

Woodruff  Cotton  Mills  Woodruff,  S.  C.  750 

York  Mfg.   Co.  Saco,  Maine  577 

io7^379 


ORDERS  RECEIVED  BEFORE  JULY  i, 

BUT  NOT  ENTERED  ON  OUR 

SHOP  RECORDS. 

Lane  Mills  ...                                      New  Orleans,  La.  520 

fames  S.  Gary  >S:   Sons                    Baltimore,  Md.  S6 

Wamsutta  Mills        New  Bedford,  Mass.  300 

Richard  Borden  Mfg.  Co Fall  River,  Mass.  100 

Pocasset  Mfg.  Co.                             Fall  River.  Mass.  174 

Whitman  Mills                                     New  Bedford,  Mass.  [3 

Everett  Mills                                         Lawrence.  Mass.  364 

Home  Cotton  Mills                            St.   Louis,  Mo.  102 

Pacolet  Mfg.  Co.                             Pacolet,  S.  C.  942 

Peppered  Mfg.  Co.                               Biddeford.  Maine  14 

Jackson  Co.                                        Nashua.  X.  II.  60 

Swift  Mfg.  Co.                                 Columbus,  Ga.  1 

Ninety  Six  Cotton   Mills                    Ninety  Six.  S.  C.  24 

Jackson  Cotton  Mills                           Iva.  S.   C.  350 

3050 


236 


LIST  OF  ATTACHMENTS  APPLIED  TO 

OTHER  MAKES  OF  LOOMS   TO 

JULY  1,  i9o5. 


NAME. 

Aiken  Mfg.  Co. 
Amoskeag  Mfg.  Co. 

Androscoggin  Mills 
Appleton  Co. 
Arlington  Mills 
Atlantic  Cotton  Mills 
Atlantic  Mills 


Bates  Mfg.  Co. 
Boston  Mfg.  Co. 
Botany  Worsted  Mills 

Cawthon  Cotton  MillsCo. 
China  Mfg.  Co. 
Continental   Mills 


PLACE 

Filling- 
Changer. 

Warp 

Mop. 

Motion. 

Bath.  S.  C. 

I 

I 

Manchester.  X.    H. 

10,555 

Lewiston,  Me 

53 

53 

Lowell.  Mass. 

47 

Lawrence.  Mass. 

1 

13 

9 

2 

Providence,  R.  I. 

1 

Lewiston.  Maine 

26 

Waltham,  Mass. 

300 

Passaic.  X.  L 

10 

Selma,  Ala. 

16 

16 

Sun  cook.  X.  H. 

14 

<4 

Lewiston.  Maine 


Dallas  Mfg.  Co. 
Davol  Mills 


Huntsville.  Ala. 
Fall  River.  Mass. 


S2 


82 


Eagle  iV.  Phenix  Mills 
Everett  Mill- 
Exposition  Cotton  Mills 

Fulton  Bag  &  Cotton  Mills 

( Jibson  Mfsr.  Co. 


Columbus.  Georgia 
Lawrence.  Mass 
Atlanta.  Ga. 

Atlanta.  Ga. 

Concord.  X.   C. 


101 

773 

1 


237 


NAME. 

Gosnold  Mills  Corp. 
Grinnell  Mfg.  Corp. 

Hargraves  Mills 
Hathaway  Mfg.   Co. 


1 
PLACE. 

Filling- 
Changer. 

Warp 

Stop 

Motion. 

New  Bedford,  Mass. 

-So 

New  Bedford,  Mass. 

2 

Fall  River,  Mass. 

45 

2  I 

New   Bedford,   Mass. 

43  2 

Fall   River,   Mass. 

142 

6 

Clinton,  Mass. 

2288 

King  Philip  Mills 

Lancaster  Mills 

Lockwood  Company  Waterville,  Maine 

Lorraine  Mfg.  Co.  Pawtucket.  R.  I. 

Manville  Co.  Manville,    R.   I. 

Manville  Co.,  Globe  Mill  Woonsocket,   R.   I. 

Manville  Co.,  Social  Mill  Woonsocket,   R.   I. 

Mass.  Mills  in   Georgia    .  Lindale,  Georgia 

Mechanics  Mills  Fall  River,  Mass. 

Merrimack  Mfg.  Co.  Lowell,  Mass. 

Methuen  Co.  Methnen,  Mass. 


556 

43 

409 

6 


Nashua  Mfg.  Co.  Nashua,  N.  H. 

Nanmk'gSteamCottonCo.      Salem,   Mass. 

New  York  Mills  New  York  Mills.  X.  Y 


Otis  Company 

Pacific  Mills 
Parker  Mills 
Parkhill  Mfg.  Co. 
Pemberton  Co. 
Poe  Mfg.  Co.,  F.   W. 


Ware,  Mass. 

Lawrence.  Mass. 
Warren.   R.  I. 
Fitchburg,  Mas-. 
Lawrence.  Mass. 
( rreenville,  S.  C. 


2S 

60 

'3 


^:vs 


Warp 

Fillintf-  Stop- 

NAME.  PLACE.  Changer.    Motion. 


Rhode  Island  Co.  Spray,  N.  C. 


Salt's  Textile  Mfg.  Co. 
Shetucket  Company 
Stark  Mills 
Stevens  Mfg.  Co. 
Susquehanna  Silk  Mills 
Samoset  Co.  .... 


Tecumseh  Mills  Fall  River,  Mass.  i               i 

Trainer&SonsMfg.Co..D.  Trainer,   Pa. i 

Treinont  &   Suffolk  Mills  Lowell,  Mass.  S          304 

Utica   Steam   &   Mohawk 

Valley  Cotton  Mills  Utica,  N.  Y.  1              1 


Bridgeport,  Conn.  

S 

Norwich,  Conn. 

1 

Manchester,   X.  H. 

1 

Fall  River,  Mass. 

1 1 1 

Sunbury,  Pa. 

7 

Valley  Falls.  R.  I. 

1 

1 

Wamsutta  Mills                        New  Bedford,  Mass.  10 

Webster  Mfg.  Co.                  Suncook,  N.  H. i              1 

West  Bovlston  Mfg.  Co.        Easthampton,   Mass.  2 

Whittenton  Mfg.  Co.             Taunton,  Mass.  4            16 

York  Mfg.  Co Saco,  Me 1            69 

1,360    17,589 

ALSO 

Complete  looms,  not  on   list,   shipped   to  foreign  coun- 
tries or  agents,  etc.  I-7I7 
Extra  Filling-Changers  109 
Extra  Warp  Stop-Motions  85 


239 


TOTALS. 

Complete  Northrop  Looms  sold  to  date,  113,591 

Number  of  Filling-Changers  applied,.  113,615 

Number  of  Warp  Stop-Motions  applied,  129,820 
Plain  Looms  made  at  or  ordered  from 

Hopedale  Works,  2,456 


The  looms  changed  over  include  looms  made  by  our 
licensees  in  the  United  States  and  furnished  to  mills  also  in  the 
United  States. 

These  figures  do  not  include  the  many  thousand  looms 
made  under  license  in  Canada,  England,  France,  Germany. 
Switzerland,  Austria  and  Hungary. 

A  few  of  the  figures  differ  from  former  statements,  inas- 
much as  cancellations  and  exchanges  occur  more  or  less.  This 
list  is  correct  at  the  time  of  compilation. 


This  volume  is  intended  to  contain  all  the  general  infor- 
mation necessary  regarding  our  looms,  including  all  the  informa- 
tion previously  published  in  other  catalogues  or  circulars  that  is 
pertinent.  We  are  sometimes  asked  by  overseers  or  second- 
hands,  to  send  them  books  containing  numbers  and  description 
of  our  various  loom  parts  in  detail.  We  have  such  printed  lists 
and  are  glad  to  furnish  their,  to  the  mills  which  purchase  our 
looms,  but  thev  are  too  expensive  in  character  to  be  generally 
distributed.  Any  overseer,  or  other  operative,  can  probably 
have  access  to  this  list  in  the  mill  office,    if  necessary. 


!40 


As  soon  as  this  present  second  edition  is  exhausted,  we  shall 
follow  with  a  third  in  which  the  newer  devices  will  be  ex- 
ploited. Any  further  information  regarding  looms,  or  am'  of 
our  other  products,  will  be  cheerfully  furnished  on  application. 
To  those  not  fully  informed  as  to  the  general  scope  of  our  busi- 
ness, we  will  say  that  while  the  Northrop  looms  are  our  chief 
product,  we  have  been  introducing  cotton  machinery  improve- 
ments since  1S16,  our  line  of  manufacture  before  taking  up  the 
Northrop  loom  being  devoted  to  the  introduction  of  High  Speed 
Spindles  for  spinning  frames,  Spinning  Rings,  Spinning  Frame 
Separators,  Loom  Temples,  Warpers,  Twisters,  Spoolers,  Reels, 
Banding  Machines,  Balling  Machines,  etc.,  etc.  We  have  other 
literature  relating  to  these  products  which  we  will  be  glad  to 
send  on  application. 

DRAPER  COMPANY, 

Hopedale,  Mass. 
July  i,  igoj. 


-41 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

Miscellaneous — Frontispiece,  title,  etc 1-6 

Former  literature  on  the  Northrop  Loom 7-1 1 

The  Art  of  Weaving  12-21 

History  of  the  Northrop  Loom  22~27 

Quotations  from  advertisements 28-40 

The  Present  .Standing  of  Our  Loom  4r"45 

Hoppers,  Thread-cutters,  Shuttles,  Bobbins,  etc.  46-63 

Warp  Stop-motions  .....  64-69 

Devices  for  Making  Perfect  Cloth 69-73 

Double  Fork .....:.... 74~7S 

Standard  Models  of  Loom  Construction 7S~92 

Loom  construction  details 93-112 

Specification 1 13-1  2  1 

Instructions  for  Running  Northrop  Loon  s 122-173 

Cotton  Mill  Products 174-175 

Prices  and  Profits  176-190 

The  Labor  Question 191-197 

Attempts  at  Competition 19S-201 

Patent  Infringement  and  Control 201-206 

Addenda 207-223 

Sales 224-239 

Index        241-244 

Memoranda  24S-24S 


242 


INDEX. 

Advertisements 28-40 

Anti-Bang     90,  96 

Art  of  Weaving  ...« 12-21 

Bobbins 61-63,    126,  130-134,  171,  193-195 

Brake     [07-10S,  161-162,  211 

Breakage  of  Filling 125,  129-130,  215 

Bunches  in  Cloth  I32_I33 

Bunches  on  Feeler  Bobbins  73'  x34 

Census  Reports 174-175,  1S1 

Changing  Over  Looms    92,  193-195 

Checks  130,  218-220 

Cleaning  Looms 45'  l(^6 

Cloth  Defects 10S,  1 7 1  - 1 73 

Cloth  Inspection 1 75 

Competition 11,  42,  193-195,  19S-200 

Construction  of  Looms  93,  213-214 

Cop  Looms       54-55i  129-130,  134-135,  173,  215 

Cop  Skewers  54,  59,  62-63,  135,  215 

Cost  of  Looms 168-169,  1S5 

Cost  of  Weaving 87-100 

Cotton  Mill  Products 174-175 

Cut  Motion  80,  82,  86,  99-107,  154,  212,  217-218 

Dimensions  of  Looms 1 18-121 

Dobby 79,  Si,  97 

Double  Fork 74-75,  S9-90,  97,  155-156,  171,  217 

Double  Pick  Cloth 170 

Drawing-in  Frame 112,  164 

Drop  Wires 67-68,  141-144,  173 

Feeler  (or  Mispick  Preventer) 62,  69-73,  85,  149-15 1,  172,  200 

Feeler  Thread-Cutter 72-73,  150-151 


243 


Filling  Fork  155-156 

Floats  45,  66,  171 

Foreign  Loom  introduction  201,  225-226 

Hand  Loom 12-17 

Harness  Cams 146-147 

Heddles 64-67,    135-136,  13S-I-IO,  145,  216 

History 1  1-43 

Hopper 46-49,52-57,  76-89,  122-124,  '71!  221'222 

Instructions  for  Running  Northrop  Looms  122-173,  221-223 

Knots  in  Warp 146 

Labor  Question 191 -197 

Labor  on  Plain  Loom 43~44>  r93-I95 

Lay I56-157,  J59'  l65i  2I7 

Lay  Adjustments 123-124,  150,  157,  159,  217 

Let-off  77,  94-96,  151-152,  172,  212,  217 

List  of  Inventors 2,  203-206 

Literature  on  Northrop  Loom 7"11'  26-27 

Litigation 1 1,  199-200 

Long  Bobbin  Experiments 193-195 

Loom  Adjustments 163 

Loom  Arrangement 222-223 

Loom  Equipment 169-170 

Loom  Power 165 

Loom  Seats  in,  20S 

Misthread  Stop-motions 50-^1 ,  1  28 

Misthreading 50,  60,  127-1 29 

Models  of  Looms 7^"92<  211,  217 

Number  of  Looms  per  Weaver  77,  80,  S5.  87,  94,  97, 

[83,  18S-1S9,  193-194.  197 

Patents 2,  17-19,  63,  177,  199-206 

Patent  Control 11,  200-206 

Patent  Infringement  199-200 

Percentage  of  production,  So,  167.  175,  178-180,  1S3.  187-189,  197 


244 


Plain  Power  Loom.  14-21,43-44,  6$.  90-92,  182,  191-192.  193-19^ 
Plan  of  Works  ...  6 

Press  Notices 7-10 

Prices 176,  185,  190 

Print  Cloth    15-16,  74,  82,  89,  97,  1S7 

Product  per  Operative 14-16,  25.  117.  167.  177,  197 

Profits  by  use  of  Northrop  Loom  10c,  176-190 

Protector 126,  161 

Ree<l  103.  145.  157-159,  173 

Repairs 166-16S.  1  75 

Replacement  of  Common   Looms   4I_42 

Sales  of  Northrop  Looms  41,  181,  224-239 

Seconds     84.  17^ 

Selvage  147-148 

Shedding  Motion, 79-S3.S6.S8. 97-9S.  [46-147. 163. 1  72. 20S-2 10, 2 16 
Shuttles     26,  47.  49-51,  5S-60,  66^  124-130.  190-192,  200,  212.  216 

Shuttle  Boxes  (including  binders) 127.  160-161.  211 

Shuttle  Changers   I7"I9>  21-25,  19S-200 

Shuttle  Guard  1 10 

Shuttle  Position  Detector,  50-51.  56-57,  72-73,86,  122-123.  I2$.  216 

Sizing  Warp  .  164-165 

Slack  threads    * 66,  144 

Specifications 11 3-1 21 

Speed 14-16.90,  165.  16S,  175,  iSS.  206 

Take-up 77-S0.  S2.  9S-107.  153-155.  172 

Temple  Thread-cutter ^o-^i.  14S-149.  216 

Thin-place  Preventer  74,  109,  217 

Transferrer 49.  53,  57,  123 

Warp  Beams    1^2 

Warp  Breakage 66-67,  I25<  x40'  J45-  x93«  2I6 

Warp  Stop-motion       25,  4^-45.  64-69.  So.  S6,  112. 

135-144.  193-195,  200.  20S-209.  212,  216 
Waste 72,  169 


245 
.MEMORANDA. 


246 
MEMORANDA. 


247 
MEMORANDA. 


-4s 
MEM  OR  AX  DA. 


